1^.;^» 


AV  tA'' 


¥^c<. 


t^Jj^A'    < 


;4v 


'.V 


f 


M^ 


^^v. 


Ki.  t; 


^  PEINCETON,  N.  J.  '^^ 


Presented  by  Mr.  Samuel  Agnew  of  Philadelphia,  Pa. 


Agneiv  Coll.  on  Baptism,  No.       /./TSZ^tZ^-^ 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arciiive 

in  2011  with  funding  from 

Princeton  TJieological  Seminary  Library 


http://www.archive.org/details/meaningpowerofbaOOstea 


THE 


MEANING    AND    POWER 


BAPTISM. 


BV 

Rev.  J.  G.  D.'STEARNS. 


T6   aWouaBrivai   Tov  PairTi^6nevov.—BA3SL, 


New  York  : 
N.  TIBBALS  &  SONS,  PUBLISHERS, 

37  PARK  ROW. 

1S77. 


Copyright. 

J.  G.  D.  STEARNS, 

1876. 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  I. 
The  Meaning  Determined  by  Usage,     .        .        ,        .IS 

CHAPTER  H. 
Examples  of  Usage, •     37 

CHAPTER  HI. 
Special  Discussion  of  Sirach  xxxiv.  30,         ...     72 

CHAPTER  IV. 
Genuineness  of  the  Quotation  from  Josephus,     .        .     92 

CHAPTER  V. 
Baptisms  in  tlie  Septuagint, 103 

CHAPTER  VI. 
Secondary  Meaning  in  the  Lexicons 123 

CHAPTER  VII. 
Biblical  Scholars, ,        .  133 

CHAPTER  VIII. 
Jewish  Baptisms  in  the  New  Testament,       ,        ,        .  154 

CHAPTER  IX. 

Baptism  with  Water, ,        .  180 

9 


lo  Contents. 

CHAl^TER  X. 
The  Baptism  of  Jesus, 215 

CHAPTER  XI. 
Tiie  Baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 235 

CHAPTER  Xn. 
Baptism  into  Christ, ,        .  258 


PREFACE. 


OF  the  origin  of  this  book  some  explanation 
is  due.  Controversy  is  not  congenial  to 
my  feelings,  nor  consonant  to  my  accustomed 
method  of  treating  religious  truth.  But  the  in- 
cessant agitation  of  the  subject  of  baptism  by 
those  who  teach  that  there  is  no  baptism  without 
immersion,  and,  as  some  say,  no  salvation  without 
baptism,  called  forth  from  various  sources  the  ex- 
pression of  a  desire  that  I  would  preach  a  dis- 
course on  the  subject.  The  discourse,  whose 
only  aim  was  to  give  instruction  on  this  as  on 
other  Biblical  themes,  was  delivered  and,  by  re- 
quest, was  printed.  Some  time  afterwards  a  harsh 
review  of  the  sermon  appeared,  to  which  a  reply 
was  made  in  "The  Reviewer  Reviewed."  An- 
other review  came,  to  which  a  reply  was  contem- 
plated ;  but  the  character  of  the  review  was  such 
that  1  decided,  without  making  formal  reference 
to  the  review,  to  present  the  subject  on  its  own 
merits.  This  Avill  better  accomplish  the  purpose 
of  the  book,  which  is  not  to  meet  the  demands 
of  those  who  delight  in  controversy,  but  of  those 
who  are  sincerely  desirous  of  knowing  the  truth. 
1  shall  not  discuss  the  subject  in  all  its  myriad  as- 
pects, but  shall  treat  of  such  points  as  from  time 


1 2  Preface. 

to  time  have  come  up  for  enquiry.  This  explana- 
tion is  given  to  account  for  the  selection  of  the 
topics,  as  well  as  for  the  occasion  of  the  book,  and 
for  the  style  and  method  in  which  it  is  written. 
The  aim  has  been  to  give  to  all  the  topics  treated 
a  thorough  discussion,  and  it  is  hoped  that  it  will 
meet  a  want  which  is  widely  felt  and  often  ex- 
pressed. 
Clearwater,  Minn.,  July,  1S76. 


.  <^>  '^ 


THE  MEANING  AND  POWER  OF  BAPTISM,^ 


CHAPTER  1. 

THE   MEANING   DETERMINED    BV   USAGE. 

/"^HILDREN  learn  the  mecani.ig  of  their 
^^  mother  tons^ue  in  the  daily  intercourse 
of  life.  Those  who  spoke  and  wrote  the  Greek 
language  in  the  times  of  the  New  Testament 
understood  its  meaning  as  well  as  we  do  oui 
own  vernacular.  The  Greek  word  BAI'TIZO  was 
in  current  use  among  the  Jewish  people,  who 
had  spoken  the  Greek  language  for  several 
generations,  and  they  were  so  familiar  with  its 
meaning  that  thev  needed  no  explanation. 

The  usual  metliod  in  which  scholars  have  con- 
ve3'ed  to  us  the  meaning  of  the  ancient  languages 
has  been  by  means  of  lexicons,  commentaries,  and 
sometimes  bv  dissertations  or  treatises  on  words 
of  special  importance.  Another  method  is  by 
giving  examples  of  the  use  of  words  in  quotations 
from  ancient  authors.  This  method  has  a  signal 
advantage.      It  presents  the  authors  themselves 


14       The  JMcaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

to  our  view,  and  g-ives  us  the  opportunity  to  see 
the  meaning-  of  their  words  as  the\'  themselves 
were  accustomed  to  use  them  in  current  speech. 
It  allows  "  the  impartial  witnesses  of  antiquity  to 
speak  directh'  "  to  us.  and  we  can  judge  of  their 
meaning  as  we  do  of  the  words  we  daily  read 
or  hear.  Examples  will  be  given  in  the  se- 
cond chapter  from  Jewish  and  Patristic  writers 
of  the  meaning  of  baptizo  in  its  icligious 
usage. 

As  this  word  has  a  classic  origin,  and  as  its 
classic  usage  sustains  a  relation  to  its  religious 
usage,  and,  by  the  laws  of  language-develop- 
ment, prepared  the  way  for  it,  and  as  appeal 
is  often  made  to  its  classic  usage  in  the  inter- 
pretation of  it  in  the  New  Testament,  this 
preliminary  chapter  will  be  given  to  a  bi'ief 
consideration   of  its   meaning  in  classic  Greek. 

The  two  Greek  words  capto  and  eaptizo 
resemble  each  other  in  appearance  and  in  sound, 
and  have  been  "  considered  bv  most  writers  as 
perfectly  identical  in  their  signification.  .  .  . 
The  learned  Dr.  Gale  .  .  .  says  .  .  .  that 
they  are  exactly  the  same  as  to  signification" 
(Carson  on  "  Baptism,"  p.  18).  But  recent  inves- 
tigation has  shown  that  these  words  differ  from 
each  other  in  meaning,  and  that  thev  each   have 


The  Mcanhig  determined  by  Usage..       1 5 

primary  and  secondary  significations.  A  com- 
parison of  these  words  in  respect  to  their  dif- 
ferences and  resemblances  in  classic  usage  will 
facilitate  the  understanding  of  the  meaning  of 
baptizo  in  Hellenistic  Greek,  which  is  the  lan- 
guage of  the  New  Testament. 

The  primar^^  meaning  of  bapto,  to  dip,  is  illus- 
trated in  such  examples  as  tlie  following : 

"  One  must  dip  [the  bucket]  and  then  draw 
it  up  "   (Aristotle). 

"Dip  honey  with  a  pitcher"  (Theocritus\ 

"  Take  a  vessel,  and,  dipping  it,  bring  hither 
some  sea-water"  (^Euripides). 

"  To-day  .  .  .  dip  not  "  your  pitchers  in  the 
river  (Callimachus). 

These  are  samples  from  an  extensiv^e  usage  in 
Greek  writers,  and  such  examples  make  it  plain 
that  bapto,  in  its  primary  signification,  denotes 
entrance  into  a  fluid,  with  immediate  return.  It 
is  therefore  represented  in  English  by  the  word 
dip^  which  means  "  to  put  for  a  moment  into  any 
liquid  ;  to  insert  in  a  fluid  and  withdraw  again  " 
(Webster).     It  denotes  a  definite  act — to  dip. 

Until  recently  it  has  been  maintained  that  this 
is  tiie  only  meaning  of  bapto,  and  that  baptizo 
has  exactly  the  same  meaning;  tliat  the  two 
words  have  one  and  the  same  signification  ;  that 


1 6      The  Meaning  and  Poiver  of  Baptism, 

both  words  mean  di|),  and  nothing  but  dip,  in  the 
whole  Greek  hmguage.  Dr.  Gale  sa^ys :  "  Dipping 
only  is  baptism.  I'll  begin  with  the  words  bapto 
and  baptizo,  for  they  are  synonymous. "  Dr.  F. 
A.  Cox  sa\s  :  "  The  idea  of  dipping  is  //-:  every 
instance  conveyed  ...  by  all  the  current 
uses  of  the  terms"  (Dale,  "Johannic  Baptism," 
pp.  44,"  45).  The  translator  of  the  Baptist  Ver- 
sion of  Mark  and  Luke  says:  "  There  is  no  dif- 
ference, as  to  signihcation,  between  bapto  and 
baptizo."  The  translator  of  the  Baptist  Version 
of  Acts  says  :  '"  They  can  Lave  but  one  literal  and 
proper  r,ieaning.  .  .  .  Bapto  occurs  in-  the  New 
Testament  three  times,  always  ti^anslated  by  dipy 
Roger  Williams,  on  his  return  from  England  to 
this  countiy  in  1644,  brought  ov^er  a  treatise 
bearing  the  title:  "Dipping  is  Baptizing,  and 
Baptizing  is  Dipping."  In  the  Baptist  Quarterly, 
October,  1871,  T.  J.  M.  says  :  "  It  must  never  be 
forgotten  that  the  radical  idea  of  baptism  is  a 
dipping  into"'  (''  Christie  and  Patristic  Baptism," 
p.  151). 

But  the  primary  meaning  of  bapto  is  not  its 
only  meaning.  It  has  also  the  secondary  mean- 
ing to  dye.  In  its  primary  meaning  it  denotes  a 
specihc  act — to  dip  :  but  in  its  secondary  mean- 
ing it  does  not   express   anv   S}^ccific   act,    but   it 


The  Meaning  determined  by  Usage.        1 7 

expresses  the  condition  of  the  object  which  is 
dyed.  It  does  not  express  the  act  by  wliich  the 
qualit}'  of  color  is  communicated  to  the  object, 
but  it  expresses  the  condition  of  color  which  is^ 
produced  in  the  object.  This  condition  mav  be 
produced  by  any  act  that  can  bring  the  object 
under  the  influence  of  the  coloring  material.  It 
nia\'  be  done  by  dipping,  or  l)v  sprinkling,  or  by 
pouring,  or  by  any  other  mode  that  can  secure 
the  result. 

"  When  it  drops  upon  the  garments,  they  are 
dyed''  (Hippocrates). 

In  this  instance  the  net  bv  which  the  coloring 
fluid  comes  upon  the  garments  is  expressed  by 
t4ie  word  "drops";  but  the  effect  in  the  colored 
condition  of  the  garments  is  expressed  bv  the 
word"rt^]rc/"  (bapto). 

"  He  fell,  without  even  looking  upwards,  and 
the  lake  was  dyed  with  blood  "  (.Esop). 

In  the  battle  of  the  frogs  and  mice  in  the  fable, 
the  blood  of  the  champion  that  was  killed  tinged 
the  lake  v/ith  a  red  color.  The  word  expresses 
the  condition  of  the  lake  as  colored  bv  tlie  blood. 

'■'■  This  garment,  dyed  by  the  sword  of  ^'Egis- 
thus,  is  a  witness  to  me  "  (^Eschylus). 

The  blood  running  down  over  the  sword  gave 
it  a  red  color. 


1 8       T/ie  Meaning  ajid  l\nvcr  of  Jtaptisni. 

"A   gannciit    dyed  \\\   blood'"   ( Rc\^   xi\.    13). 

The  translation  ''  djcd,"  as  j^ivcn  by  Stuart,  is 
correct,  rather  than  the  Eng-lish  version,  "  dipped." 
The  irarment  of  Him  who  rode  on  the  white 
horse  was  stained  with  tiie  bh)od  of  iiis  enemies 
in  the  conflict   of  battle. 

"  The  coh:)r  of  things  djwd  is  chang-ed  by  the 
aforesaid  causes"   (Aristotle). 

The  cliange  in  the  color  of  things  that  are  dyed 
is  an  c'Jfc'ct  of  the  causes  that  operate  to  produce 
the  change,  and  this  change  of  condition  is  ex- 
pressed by  the  word  "  dyed."' 

"  They  are  desirous  to  dye  wool,  so  as  to  make 
it  purple  "  (f^lato). 

The  condition  is  changed  from  a  white  to  a 
purple   color. 

"  They  rt^r  the  robe  of  Venus  "  (Achilles  Tatius). 

Dr.  Carson  accepts  this  secondary  meaning  of 
bapto,  and  admits  "  that  dyeing  is  the  secondary 
meaning  of  this  word  "  :  that  it  "denotes  dyeing, 
without  reference  to  mode."  "  It  signifies  to  dye 
in  any  manner'"  ("Baptism,"  p.  44).  Dr.  Dale, 
who  has  elucidated  the  subject  more  fully, 
says:  ''Bapto,  seeondary.,  demands  for  its  o'cjeet  a 
dyed  eondilion.  It  has  no  form  of  act  of  its  own." 
"  //  drops  all  demand  for  any  form  of  aet,  and  makes 
requisition  only  for  a  condition  or  quality  of  color, 


Th:!  Meaning  detey/nined  by  IJsagv.       1 9 

satisfied  wltli  asiv  act  whicli  will  meet  this  le- 
quircnient"  ("Classic   I3aptism,"  pp.  351,  1-8). 

The  word  has  also  other  meaning-s — /o  zvct,  to 
slain^  to  bcdciv,  to  gdd,  to  vioistoi,  examples  ot 
which  arc  given  by  Stuart  and  Dale.  "  Being 
[Messed,  it  moistens  and  colors  the  hand"  (Aris- 
'otle). 

Here  bapto,  moisten,  does  not  express  the  act 
of  pressing  the  berry,  but  the  effect  on  the  hand, 
it  does  not  dip  the  hand  ;  it  moistens  the  hand 
with  the  juice  of  the  berry.    • 

The  atlmission  by  immersionists  of  a  secondary 
meaning  to  bapto  is  very  recent.  It  was  long  and 
earnestly  maintained  that  bapto  and  baptizo  are 
equivalent  in  signification.  For  two  and  a  half 
centuries  this  opinion  was  defended.  Elaborate 
argumentation  was  put  forth  .to  show  that  even 
such  examples  of  bapto  as  are  given  above  have 
only  the  primary  meaning,  to  dip.  Dr.  Gale,  a 
learned  and  eminent  defender  of  this  theory,  says 
of  the  quotation  from  ^'Esop:  "  The  literal  sense 
is,  the  lake  was  dipped  in  blood."  In  explaining 
it  he  i-epresentcd  the  lake  as  "  dipped  b}-  hyper- 
bole." Such  inflation  of  rhetoric  must  sooner 
or  later  collapse.  Even  Dr.  Carson  exclaims : 
"  What  a  monstrous  paradox  in  rhetoric  is  the 
figure  of  the   dipping  of  a  lake   in  the   blood  of 


20       TJie  Mcanino  aiid  Po^cer  of  Baptism. 

a  mouse!"  ('p.  48).  Since  tiie  defence  of  the 
secondary  meaning  by  Dr.  Carson,  it  has  been 
more  generally  admitted.  Alexander  Campbell 
acknowledges  that  bapto  signifies  both  lo  dip  and 
to  dye. 

These  two  meanings  of  bapto  have  widcl}-  dif- 
ferent characteristics.  The  primar_v  meaning  de- 
notes a  specific  act — to  dip  ;  the  secondare'  mean- 
ing expresses  condition — a  dyed  condition.  The 
primary  meaning  expresses  onl}^  one  kind  of  act- 
to  dip;  the  secondary  meaning  admits  of  any 
one  of  several  acts  that  can  effect  the  condition. 
The  act  bv  which  an  object  can  be  dyed  may 
be  that  of  putting  into,  dropping  upon,  pour- 
ing, sprinkling,  pressing,  smearing,  or  any  other 
act  that  can  produce  the  condition  of  color  in 
the  object.  The  act  denoted  bv  bapto  primary 
is  a  monieutary  act,  transient,  feeble  in  its  in- 
fluence; the  condition  which  bapto  secondar}' 
expresses  is  permanent :  it  has  no  limit  of  time. 

As  the  meaning  of  bapto  has  been  determined 
b\'  an  appeal  to  usage,  so  the  meaning  of  bap- 
tizo  can  be  determined  bj*  a  similar  appeal. 
The  argument  of  Dr.  Carson  from  the  deriva- 
tion of  the  word,  in  which  he  is  followed  bv 
Alexander  Campbell  and  others,  is  in  itself  of 
no  force,   and   has  no  value   unless   sustained  by 


The  Meaning  determined  by  Usage.       21 

usage.  Alexander  Campbell  says  that  "  baptizo 
indicates  a  specific  action,  and  can  have  but  one 
meaning-;  it  derives  its  meaning  and  immuta- 
ble form  from  bapto,  and  therefore  inherits 
the  proper  meaning  of  the  hap.  which  is  dip"" 
("Christie  and  Patristic  Baptism,"  p.  18).  But, 
as  Dr.  Carson  says,  p.  46:  ''Use  is  the  sole 
ARBITER  OF  LANGUAGE."  It  is  in  the  actual 
usage  of  the  word  that  its  meaning  is  seen. 
Examples  of  usage  are  decisive,  while  deriva- 
tion, even  if  ascertained,  cannot  be  decisive ; 
for,  if  bapto  can  undergo  a  change  of  meaning 
by  usQge,  baptizo  can  also  receive  a  meaning 
from  usage  different  from   its   root. 

Before  the  two  meanings  of  bapto  and  baptizo 
were  distinguished  from  each  other,  the  supposi- 
tion that  baptizo  was  derived  from  bapto  was  re- 
lied upon  as  evidence  that  the  two  words  were 
perfectl}-  identical  in  signification.  But  bapto 
has  two  meanings,  a  primary  and  a  secondary. 
From  which  of  these  two  meanings  does  baptizo 
come?  Does  it  come  from  bapto  primary,  which 
denotes  a  specific  act?  Or  does  it  come  from 
bapto  secondar}^  which  expresses  condition  re- 
sulting from  any  act  competent  to  effect  the  con- 
dition? x-\nd  if  it  comes  from  the  one  or  the 
other,   whichever   it    be,   has    the    derivative  the 


2  2     TJie  Meaning  and  Pon'cr  of  Baptism. 

same  identical  meaning"  as  ils  primitive?  Are 
two  words  necdcci  tc;  express  one  and  the  same 
identical  meaning?  "  iiaptist  writers  say  it  comes 
trom  bap/o,  to  dip.  1  liev  once  said  bapto  did  not 
mean  to  dye  ;  thev  now  admit  that  it  does,  iiut 
thev  have  not  reviewed  the  meaning  ol  baptiao  in 
the  light  ot  this  correction  ""  (Dale'),  The  qnes- 
tion  returns.  Does  baptizo  come  from  bapto  pri- 
mary, which  denotes  a  specific  act,  "mode  and 
nothing  but  mode"?  (^Carson).  Or  docs  it  come 
Ironi  bapto  secondarv,  which  ''drops  all  demand 
for  any  f 01)11  of  act,  and  makes  requisition  only  for 
condition.  .  .  .  satisfied  with  any  act  which 
will  meet  the  requirement"?  (Dale).  Dr.  Carson 
affirms  the  former,  Dr.  Dale  the  latter.  Dr.  Car- 
son, '•  American  Baptist  Publication  Society," 
i860,  p.  55,  says:  ''Bapto,  the  root,  I  have  shown 
to  possess  two  meanings,  and  two  only:  to  dip  and 
to  dye,  Bapti::o,  1  have  asserted,  has  but  one  sig- 
nification. It  has  been  formed  on  the  idea  of  the 
primal'}'  meaning  of  the  root,  and  has  never  ad 
mitted  the  secondar\-.  .  .  .  My  position  is 
THAT  IT  ALWAYS  SIGNIFIES  TO  DIP,  NEVER  EX- 
PRESSING ANYTHING  BUT  MODE." 

Dr.  Dale,  on  the  otlicr  hand,  says  :  "  For  this 
statement  there  is  not  the  shadow  of  support,  as 
seen  by  the  facts  of  usage  and  the  defining  terms 


The  Mi  ailing  deterniincd  by  Usrge.       23 

ol  lexicoi^raplr.r  ^.  I'lic  reverse  statement  wt^iild 
be  iar  luarcr  the  tnitli.  There  is  no  evidence 
that  baptizo  does  ever  i^ive  expression  to  dip  in 
its  s|iecilic  character.  There  is  no  evidence  that 
it  expi-esses  modal  act  ol  anv  kind.  'There  is  no 
conclusive  evidence  that  '  tiiis  word  has  been 
formed  on  the  ])rimary  meaning  ol  the  root,' 
There  is,  1  think,  conclusive  evidence  to  the  con- 
trary. It  is  increflible  that  a  second  woi'd  should 
be  created  which  was  to  be  tlic  simple  (T^/ZA-'  ol  one 
alread}'  existini^.  The  whole  history  ol  the  word 
declares  that  what  was  a  /r/^r/ incredible  has,  in 
reality,  no  existence.  .  .  .  On  the  other  hand,  the 
general  characteristics  ol  the  secondar}^  meaning 
ol  the  root  appear  in  the  boldest  relief  through  all 
the  history  ol  the  word.  1  say  the  general  cha- 
racteristics," not  "  the  specia-lty  oi  bapto  second 
in  the  diixctioa  of  dyeing,  staining,  eoloring, 
etc.  .  .  .  Baptizo  is  an  extension  of  bapto 
second  (the  dyeing  excluded),  with  all  its  lights 
and  privileges  as  to  freedom  of  act  and  rejec- 
tion of  envelopment,  and  advancing  to  give  full 
development  to  characteristic  qualities,  powers 
and  influences  over  appropriate  objects.  .  . 
This  view  harmonizes  with  that  of  grammarians 
who  deiive  baptizo  from  baptos,  a  derivative 
from  bapto  second"  ("Johaanic  Baptism,"  p.  6j). 


2  4       The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

l"hc  opiinun  lliat  baptizo  is  "'  lorined  on  the 
primary  meaning"  ot  bapto  has  no  reason  lor  its 
support.  Two  words  of  the  same  identical 
meaning  in  one  language  are  not  needed  ;  and  as 
one  good  word  was  already  in  use  in  the  Greek 
language  to  signify  dip,  it  is,  as  Dale  savs,  "  in- 
credible "  that  another  word  should  be  created  to 
signify  exactly  the  same  thing.  Instead  of  cre- 
ating several  words  to  express  one  meaning,  we 
find  that  one  word  has  several  meanings  in  iiu 
mcrous  instances  in  all  languages. 

The  actual  meaning  of  baptizo  can  be  deter- 
mined only  by  its  usage  ;  anrl  in  its  usage  it  has 
the  characteristics  of  the  sccondarv  meaning  ot 
the  I'oot.  It  does  not  belong  to  that  class  of 
verbs  •'  which  make  demand  for  a  definite  act  to 
be  done,"  but  to  that  large  class  which  "make 
demand  for  an  effect,  a  state,  or  a  condition  to  be 
accomplished  "  ("  Classic  Baptism,"  p.  io6).  Dr. 
James  W.  Dale,  who  has  given  this  word  the 
most  thorough  investigation  which  it  has  re- 
ceived from  anv  man,  in  the  four  volumes  which 
contain  the  result  of  his  examination  of  the  usage 
of  the  word — Classic,  Judaic,  Johannic,  Christie 
and  Patristic  Baptism — has  demonstrated  that 
the  word  baptiz;)  does  not  denote  a  s[)ecific  act, 
as  to  dip,  to  sprinkle,  to  pour,  but  it  expresses  con- 


The  I\Iea:iiug  dcferviincci  by  Usage.       25 

ditwn  resulting  from  some  competent  act.  It 
thus  differs  essentially  from  the  primary  meaning 
of  bapto,  and  resembles  the  secondary  meaning 
in  its  general  characteristics.  "  Bapting  is  not 
baptizing,  nor  is  baptizing  bapting." 

In  classic  usage  baptizo  has  both  primary 
and  secondary  mean»ings.  As  the  secondary 
r.ieaning  which  it  has  in  Hellenistic  Greek  will 
be  fuU}^  illustrated  in  the  second  chapter,  it  w>*l 
be  sufficient  here  to  give  a  brief  statement  of  its 
meaning  in  classic  usage,  with  a  few  examples  in 
illustration. 

Baptizo  denotes  a  change  in  the  condi- 
tion OF  ITS  OBJECT,  THE  NATURE  OF  THE  CHANGE 
BEING  DETERMINED  BY  THE  NATURE  OF  THE  BAP- 
TIZING POWER. 

1.  Baptizo  expresses  a  change  in  the  condition 
of  its  object.  The  vital  idea  in  a  baptism  is  a 
thorough  change  in  the  character,  state,  or  con- 
dition of  its  object.  There  are  many  baptisms 
of  a  diverse  nature,  but  this  is  the  ground  idea 
common  to  all  baptisms. 

2.  Baptizo  expresses  condition,  but  not  the  act 
by  which  the  condition  is  effected.  It  implies 
some  act  or  agency,  but  the  act  is  not  expressed 
by  the  word  itself,  but  is  otherwise  expressed  or 
left  unexpressed.     It  accepts  of  any  act  or  of  any 


26      The  Mi^aiiivg  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

influence  that  L^  comp.tcnt  to  rffect  the  con- 
dition. It  expi-esses  a  concliticn  of  stupor 
caused  by  the  act  of  swallowing  an  opiate, 
a  condition  of  drunkenness  caused  by  drinkinij 
wine,  a  condition  of  coldness  caused  by  pouring 
cold  water  on  hot  iron,  a  condition  of  purit}' 
by  the  use  of  pure  water  in  any  way.  The 
acts  and  agencies  from  which  the  diverse  condi- 
tions of  baptism  result  arc  very  numerous,  and 
their  modes  of  operation  are  diverse.  More 
than  fifty  baptismal  agencies  appear  in  the  works 
of  Dale.  Dr,  Conanf,  in  his  translation  of  the 
word,  gives  no  less  than  forty  different  acts  by 
which  baptisms  are  effected  ("  Classic  Baptism,' 

p.  74). 

3.  Baptizo,  in    its   primary    meaning,  expresses 

iiuuss  of  condition.  The  object  is  in  a  state  of 
intnsposition — i.e.,  position  within  a  fluid,  a  semi- 
solid, or  a  solid.  Aristotle  speaks  of  "  certain 
desert  places  fidl  of  rush  and  sea-weed,  which, 
when  it  is  ebb  tide,  are  not  baptized,  but,  when  it 
is  full  tide,  are  flooded  "  ("  Classic  Baptism,"  p. 
236).  The  sea-coast  is  not  taken"  up  and  dipped, 
into  the  ocean.  The  tide,  rising  up,  overflows  it. 
The. baptism  was  its  condition  under  the  water. 
Strabo  says :  "  The  army  marched  throughout 
the   entire   dav  b;iptized   up  to  the  waist."     The 


The  Meaning  dderviined  by  Usage.       27 

act  was  marching'.  The  baptism  was  the  cc>ndi- 
tion  of  the  soldiers  on  the  march.  Plotiniis  and 
other  Greek  writers  speak  of  "  the  soul  baptized 
by  the  body"  ("Classic  Baptism,"  p.  264).  A 
corporeal  body  is  the  investing-  element ;  but  how 
the  soul  becomes  enclosed  in  the  body,  the  mode 
of  this  baptism,  would  be  a  question  extraneous 
to  the  meaning  of  the  word. 

4.  Baptizo  expresses  condition  without  limit  of 
duration.  It  expresses  the  condition  of  its  ob- 
ject within  the  investing  element  for  an  indefi- 
nite period  of  time.  In  this  as  in  other  res])ects 
it  differs  radically  from  bapto  primary,  which  ex- 
presses momentary  continuance  in  the  fluid,  de. 
noting  entrance  into  a  fluid  with  immediate  re- 
turn. Baptizo  does  not  take  out  what  it  puts  in, 
but  leaves  its  object  in  the  element  into  which  it 
introduces  it.  Some  other  agency  may  withdraw 
the  object,  but  baptizo  never  does.  Ships  bap- 
tized— i.e.,  sunk  in  the  sea — remain  in  that  condi- 
tion. 

"  Our  vessel  having  been  baptized  in  the  midst 
of  the  Adriatic  "  (Josephus). 

"  His  ship  having  been  baptized  "  (Diodorus 
Siculus). 

"  They  made  incessant  attacks,  and  baptized 
many  of  the  ships"  (PolNbius). 


28       The  Meaning  and  Poiver  of  Baptism. 

*'  A  lofty  billow  rising'  above  baptized  them  " 
(Josephus). 

Near!}'  thirty  examples  occur  in  Greek  writers 
of  the  baptism  of  ships.  The  act  by  wliich  the 
baptism  of  the  ships  is  caused  is  not  that  of  dipping 
— puttinij  them  into  the  water  for  a  moment  and 
taking-  them  out.  The  ships  sink  to  the  bottom, 
and  remain  in  that  condition  of  baptism  for  ages. 
The  duration  of  this  baptism  has  not  vet  run  out. 
It  still  continues  after  the  lapse  of  two  thousand 
years. 

Animals,  and  also  men,  are  in  like  manner  bap- 
tized. "  r^lany  of  the  land  animals,  enclosed  by 
the  river,  perish,  being  baptized  "  (Diodorus 
Siculuf). 

The  animals  were  not  dipped.  The  water 
(lowed  over  them  by  the  inundation  of  the  river 
Nile,  and  they  came  permanently  under  its  suffo- 
cating- power. 

"  The  river,  rolling  down  with  a  stronger  cur- 
rent, baptized  many,  and  destroyed  them  "  (Dio- 
dorus Siculus). 

In  this  baptism  the  soldiers  were  not  dipped. 
A  mere  dipping  could  not  have  injured  them. 
Tiicy  were  baptized — i.e.,  they  were  brought  under 
the  watery  clement,  and  remained  under  it.  It 
was  a  death  baptism  bv  drowning. 


The  Meaning  determined  by  Usage.      29 

"  Being  baptized  by  the  Galatians  in  a  pool,  ac- 
cording to  command,  he  died  "  (Josephus). 

"  Thrust  such  an  one  on  the  head,  baptizing  him, 
so  that  he  can  rise  no  more"  (Timon,  the  Man- 
hater,  in  Lucian). 

"  The  dolphin,  displeased  at  such  a  falsehood, 
baptizing,  killed  him  "  (^Esop). 

"  Baptizing  you  by  sea-waves,  I  will  destroy 
you  "  (Alcibiades  ;   "  Classic  Baptism,"  p,  266). 

"  I  found  Cupid  among  the  roses,  and,  holding 
him  by  the  wings,  I  baptized  him  into  the  wine, 
and  took  and  drank  him  "  (Julian,  Egypt. ;  "  Clas- 
sic Baptism,"  p.  245). 

He  was  not  dipped — put  in  and  taken  out.  He 
remained  in  the  wine,  and  in  that  condition  was 
swallowed  by  the  drinker. 

"  When  the  sons  of  the  prophet  were  cutting 
wood  with  axes  over  the  river  Jordan,  the  iron 
fell  off  and  was  baptized  in  the  river"  (Justin 
Martyr;  "Judaic  Baptism,"  p.  252). 

This  baptism  of  the  axe  would  have  lasted  to 
the  end  of  time  but  for  a  miracle.  The  condi- 
tion of  baptism  has  no  self-termination.  Baptism 
of  itself  never  recovers  its  object  from  the  condi- 
tion in  which  it  places  it.  This  is  now  admitted. 
The  National  Baptist  sviys:  "  Dr.  Dale  has  brought 
clearly   out   what    our   examination    had    before 


30       The  Meaning  a?td  Power  of  Baptism. 

proved,  that  the  word  baptizo  does  not  of  itself 
involve  the  lifting  out  from  the  fluid  of  that  which 
is  put  in."  The  Baptist  Quarterly,  April,  1869, 
says:  "  Our  Lord  did  not  command  to  put  people 
into  the  water  and  take  them  out  again,  but  tn  put 
them  under  the  zvater.  .  .  .  That  baptizo  nez>er 
does  engage  to  take  its  subject  out  of  the  Vi^ater 
.  .  .  we  readily  admit"  ("Judaic  Baptism," 
pp.  25,49). 

Dr.  Conant,  BAPTIZEIN,  ed.  1868,  p.  88, 
after  saying  that  "  the  word  immerse  expresses 
the  full  import  of  the  Greek  word  baptizein^ 
adds:  ''The  idea  of  emersion  is  not  included  in 
the  meaning  of  the  Greek  word.  It  means,  sim- 
ply, to  put  into  or  under  water."  Then  the  word 
baptizo  does  not  mean  dip  ;  for  that,  in  Hebrew, 
Latin,  Greek,  and  English,  always  does  take  out 
what  it  puts  in.  If  the  idea  of  putting  in  and 
taking  out  is  to  be  expressed  in  classic  Greek, 
baptizo  docs  not  express  it.  It  is  the  Greek  word 
bapto,  and  not  baptizo,  which  those  who  spoke 
and  wrote  the  Greek  language  employed  to  de- 
note the  deiinite  act  to  dip.  They  employed  the- 
word  baptizo  to  express  the  permanent  condition 
of  the  object  under  the  water  where  it  placed  it. 
We  must  look  elsewhere  than  to  the  classic  usage 
of  baptizo  for  a  reason  to  take  people  out  of  the 


T.':c  Jllianing  detcriuincil  by  Usage.       3 1 

water.  "  The  instinctive  love  of  life  will  do  it," 
it  is  said.  True,  indeed  !  But  this  is  an  influence 
outside  of  the  Greek  word  baptizo. 

5.  Baptizo,  like  innumerable  words  in  all  lan- 
guages, has  a  secondary  meaning,  and,  in  its 
secondary  use,  it  expresses  condition  rcsuUing 
from  causes  withoiit  intusposition  in  water,  or  in 
any  other  element.  An  opiate  drunk  from  a  cup 
baptizes — i.e.,  brings  into  a  condition  of  stupor 
(Achilles  Tatius;"  C.  B.,"p.  318).  Wine  drunk  from 
a  cup  baptizes,  brings  into  a  state  of  drunkenness 
(Conon;"C.  B.,"  p.  3(7).  Drinking  from  the  Silenic 
fount  baptizes,  makes  one  heavy-headed  and  dull 
(Lucian;  "  C.  B.,"  p.  330)-  Waterpoured  into  wine 
baptizes,  dilutes,  tempers  the  wine,  thus  changing 
its  condition  (Plutarch;  "  C.  B.,"p.339).  Puzzling 
questions  put  to  a  boy  in  school  baptize  him,  put 
him  into  a  condition  of  bewilderment  (Plato; 
"  C.  B.,"  p,  334).  In  these  and  countless  other 
Greek  baptisms  there  is  no  immersion.  The  per- 
sons baptized,  and  the  various  otlier  objects  of 
baptism,  are  not  dipped  into  the  element.  The 
subjects  of  the  opiate-baptism  were  not  dipped 
ii>to  the  cup.  The}'  drank  the  baptizing  element 
from  the  cup. 

6.  Baptizo,  both  in  its  primary  and  in  its  second 
ary  use,  secures  tJ:e  influence  of  the  baptizing  cle- 


32      The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

mcnt  over  the  object  baptized.  Unlike  bapto 
primary,  which  expresses  only  a  transient  act  of 
feeble  influence,  baptizo  is  a  ivord  of  POWER. 
This  idea  of  power  originates  in  the  primary  use 
of  the  word.  The  starting  point  is  the  condition 
of  intusposition  for  a  long,  indefinite  period  in 
which  baptizo  places  its  objects.  As  the  object 
which  baptizo  puts  into  the  water  or  other  in- 
vesting element  remains  in  the  element  and  is  not 
withdrawn,  the  baptizing  element  has  time  to 
exert  its  full  influence  upon  the  object  encom- 
passed by  it.  Some  objects,  like  flint,  or  the  iron 
in  the  axe-baptism  of  Justin  Martyr,  receive  no 
perceptible  influence  from  the  surrounding  me- 
dium. But  most  objects  do  receive  an  influence 
from  the  enveloping  element.  Complete  envelop- 
ment in  a  fluid,  a  semi-solid,  or  a  solid  will,  in 
time,  develop  its  full  influence  over  the  object 
which  comes  under  its  power.  The  object  re- 
ceives the  quality  of  the  baptizing  element,  and 
is  thus  changed  in  its  condition.  A  bag  of  salt  in 
water  dissolves.  A  sponge  in  water  imbibes  the 
element  and  is  drenched.  Ships  sunk  in  the  sea 
gradually  undergo  change  by  the  constant  action 
of  the  water.  Men  and  animals  encompassed  by 
the  watery  element  are  suffocated.  Fruit  bap- 
tized in  brine  receives  the  qualitv  of  the  brine  and 


TJie  Meaning  detoinined  by  Usage.       'i,-}^ 

is  changed  to  pickle  (Nicander;  "  C.  B.,"  p.  273). 
Objects  enclosed  in  marsh  mud  arc  b}^  it  changed 
in  the  course  of  time.  The  soul  baptized  in  the 
body  develops  and  receives  "  the  oppressive,  sen- 
suous influence  of  the  body."  Objects  remaining 
enclosed  in  the  baptizing  clement  for  years  and 
for  ages  receive  more  than  a  dipping.  They  come 
under  the  controlling  influence  of  the  fluid  or 
solid  elements  that  enclose  them.  The  encom- 
passing element  penetrates  the  object  which  it 
surrounds,  and  pervades  it  with  its  own  peculiar 
influence,  and  changes  its  condition.  Thus  by 
usage  baptizo  becomes  a  word  expressing  a 
tJiorough  change  in  the  condition  of  its  object  by  the 
controlling  influence  of  the  baptizing  element. 

In  its  secondary  use,  also,  baptizo  develops  and 
secures  the  influence  of  the  baptizing  agency  over 
the  baptized  object.  There  is  no  immersion  in 
secondary  baptism.  Intusposition  disappears; 
but  those  baptizing  agencies  which  operate  with- 
out intusposition  exert  their  own  peculiar  in- 
fluence over  the  baptized  objects.  The  opiate 
drug  has  a  powerful  influence  in  baptizing  the 
man  who  drinks  it.  It  penetrates  his  system  and 
produces  a  condition  of  stupefaction.  The  re- 
semblance between  primary  and  secondary  bap- 
tism   consists   in    the    idea    of   influence  which   is 


34      The  ]\ leaning  and  Poiver  of  Baptism. 

common  to  both.  Intusposition  is  eliminated  in 
secondary  use.  There  is  no  immersion,  no  en- 
closing medium,  no  receptive  element  into  which 
the  object  baptized  is  introduced,  no  encompass- 
ing fluid  or  solid,  as  in  primary  baptism,  but  the  re- 
semblance is  in  the  influence  which  the  baptismal 
agencies  exert  over  the  objects  which  come  under 
their  control.  In  both  classes  of  baptisms,  primar}' 
and  secondary,  the  baptismal  agencies  exert  each 
its  own  peculiar  influence,  and  the  nature  of  the 
baptism  corresponds. 

In  both  primary  and  secondar}'  baptisms,  the 
character  of  the  ehange  in  the  baptized  object  cor- 
responds to  the  nature  of  the  baptizing  power. 
The  baptizing  agency  communicates  its  own 
characteristic  quality  to  the  object  which  it  bap- 
tizes, and  assimilates  it  to  its  own  nature.  Each 
baptizing  agency  exerts  its  own  specific  influence 
upon  the  object  which  it  baptizes.  Water  envel- 
oping a  living  man  penetrates  and  pervades  his 
system,  and  by  its  peculiar  influence  over  him 
produces  suffocation.  Ships  penetrated  by  the 
water  of  the  surrounding  ocean  become  subject 
to  its  influence. 

So  the  opiate  drop,  in  baptizing  the  man  who 
drinks  it,  communicates  to  him  its  stupefying  in- 
fluence and  puts  hi^i  to  sleep.     Wine  drunk  from 


The  MiGJiijig  d.termimd  by  U.ag^.       'i^-^ 

a  cup  penetrates  and  pervades  the  human  system, 
and  baptizes  the  man  by  communicating  to  him 
its  intoxicating  influence.  The  alcoholic  quality 
baptizes  him,  makes  him  drunk.  There  are  nu- 
merous examples  of  these  wine-baptisms  in  Greek 
writers,  extending  through  a  period  of  more  than 
a  thousand  years.  The  specific  influence  of  each 
baptizing  agency  on  the  character  of  its  objects 
corresponds  to  the  characteristic  quality  of  that 
agency.  Some  baptismal  agencies  have  purify- 
ing qualities,  and  these  purifying  qualities  give 
them  a  special  influence  in  the  service  of  religion. 
A  baptized  man  is  a  man  brought  into  a  baptized 
condition  by  some  baptizing  agency,  and  the  cha- 
racter of  the  baptism  corresponds  to  the  charac- 
teristic quality  of  the  baptizing  power.  The  spe- 
cial influence  of  those  baptismal  agencies  which, 
from  their  purifying  qualities,  are  employed  for 
religious  purposes,  will  be  illustrated  in  the  next 
chapter. 

What  has  thus  far  been  said  is  only  prepara- 
tory to  the  main  question  respecting  the  religious 
signification  of  the  word.  It  is  no  inconsidera- 
ble advantage  to  distinguish  between  bapto  and 
baptizo,  which  have  been  so  long  confounded,  and 
to  illustrate  the  principle  on  which  the  argument 
from  usage  in  the  next  chapter  will  proceed.    The 


o 


6      The  Meaning  and  Poiver  of  Baptism. 


Hellenistic  usage  rests  upon  a  classic  foundation. 
Even  the  secondary  meaning — purification — has 
an  illustration  in  Plutarch  ("  C.  B.,"  p.  342).  But 
the  Hellenistic  meaning  has  an  ample  illustration 
in  its  own  sphere.  This  meaning  will  be  deter- 
mined by  examples  of  usage,  in  confident  reliance 
upon  the  principle  which  Dr.  Dale  has  applied 
with  such  eminent  success,  that  "  USE  IS  OF  SU- 
PREME AUTHORITY  AND  THE  RULE  IN  THE  LAN- 
GUAGE." 


CHAPTER  II. 

EXAMPLES   OF   USAGE — JEWISH   BAPTISMS. 

'"r^HE  Patrists  call  the  purifications  under  the 
■^  Law  baptisms;  and  these  baptisms  they 
represent  as  typical  of  baptism  under  the  Gospel. 
The  baptismal  agencies  were  sacrificial  blood, 
heifer-ashes,  and  water;  the  mode  of  applying- 
them  was  by  sprinkling ;  and  the  baptism  result- 
ing was  a  condition  of  ceremonial  purification. 
A  few  examples  will  illustrate  this. 

I.  Ambrose,  in  commenting  on  the  Septuagint 
of  Ps.  I.  9,  "  Sprinkle  me  with  hyssop,  and  I  shall 
be  clean  ;  wash  me,  and  I  shall  be  whiter  than 
snow,"  calls  the  purification  a  baptism  :  "  He 
asks  to  be  cleansed  by  hyssop  according  to  the 
Law  ;  he  desires  to  be  washed  according  to  the 
Gospel.  He  who  wished  to  be  cleansed  by  typi- 
cal baptism  was  sprinkled  with  the  blood  of  the 
lamb  by  a  bunch  of  hyssop  "  ("  Christie  and  Pa- 
tristic Baptism,"  p.  534). 

In  the  baptism  which  Ambrose  thus  describes, 
the  baptismal  agency  was  the  blood  of  the  sacrifi- 
cial lamb,  the  means  of  applying  it  to  the  person 

37 


o 


8      The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism 


was  a  Iijssop-branch,  the  mode  was  by  sprinkling, 
the  baptism  resulting  was  a  condition  of  ceremo- 
nial purification  ;  and  this  baptism  was  a  type  of 
baptism  under  the  Gospel. 

2.  Ambrose  :  "  He  who  is  baptized,  whether  in 
conformity  with  the  Law  or  in  conformity  with 
the  Gospel,  is  cleansed:  in  conformity  with  the 
Law,  because  Moses  sprinkled  the  blood  of  the 
lamb  with  a  bunch  of  hyssop  ;  in  conformity  with 
the  Gospel,  because  the  raiment  of  Christ  was 
white  as  snow.  .  .  .  Therefore  he  is  white  as 
snow  whose  sins  are  forgiven"  ('-Judaic  Bap- 
tism," p,  1 88). 

Baptism  under  the  Law  and  under  the  Gospel 
is  purification,  and  Ambrose  identifies  these  bap- 
tisms as  type  and  antitype  baptisms. 

3.  Basil  :  "  The  blood  of  the  lamb  is  a  type  ot 
the  blood  of  Christ  "  (p.  217). 

4.  Hilar}'  :  "  Sprinkling  according  to  tlie  Law 
was  the  cleansing  of  sin,  through  faith  purif3'ing 
the  people  by  the  sprinkling  of  blood  (Ps.  1.  9)  ;  a 
sacrament  of  the  future  sprinkling  of  the  blood 
of  the  Lord"  ("  The  Baptism  of  Calvar}^"  p.  34). 

5.  Didymus  Alexandrinus,  teaclier  of  the  most 
renowned  Greek  school  of  his  age,  says  :  ''  The 
very  image  of  baptism  both  continually  illumi- 
nated arid  saved  all  Israel  at  that  time,  as  Paul 


Examples  of  Usage  39 

wrote  (i  Cor.  x.  i,  2),  and  as  prophesied  Eze- 
kiel  (xxxvi.  25) :  *  I  will  sprinkle  clean  water 
upon  3'ou,  and  you  shall  be  clean  from  all  your 
sins';  and  David  (Ps.  1.  9):  'Sprinkle  me  with 
hyssop,  and  I  shall  be  clean.'  For  the  sprinkling 
with  hyssop  was  Judaic  purification,  which  is  con- 
tinued to  the  present  time  ;  but '  whiter  than  snow  ' 
denotes  Christian  illumination,  which  means  bap- 
tism." He  further  compares  the  "  baptism  which 
was  formerly  in  shadozu  '  with  "  that  which  is  in 
reality,^'  which  he  calls  "the  antitype  baptism" 
("  Jud.  Bap.,"  p.  196  ;  "  C.  and  P.  B.,"  p.  342). 

6.  Cyril,  xVrchbishop  of  Alexandria,  on  Isaiah, 
Book  I.  Dis.  I.,  referring  the  expression  (i.  16), 
"  Wash  you,  make  you  clean,"  to  baptism, 
says:  "And  this  the  ancient  law  imaged  forth 
to  them  as  in  shadows,  and  preached  before  the 
grace  which  is  through  the  holy  baptism.  For 
he  said  (Num.  viii.  ^,  ^)'-  '  Take  the  Levites  and 
cleanse  them.  And  thus  shalt  thou  do  to  cleanse 
them:  Sprinkle  water  of  purifying  upon  them  '" 
(Conant,  p.  123;    Beccher,  p.  164). 

7.  Ambrose :  "  The  Lord  also  commanded 
Moses  that  if  any  leprous  person  would  be 
cleansed.  .  .  .  Whoever  wished  to  be  cleansed 
m  proper  form  was  sprinkled  by  these  three ; 
because  no  one  can  be  cleansed  from  the  leprosy 


40      The  Ivleaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

of  sin  by  the  water  of  baptism  except  under 
the  invocation  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son, 
and  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  .  .  .  And  he  cleanses 
us,  who  are  designated  by  the  leper,  by  their  in- 
vocation and  by  the  water  of  baptism"  ("Jud. 
Bap.,"  p.  185). 

In  thus  interpreting  Jewish  baptism  in  cleans- 
ing the  leper  as  emblematical  of  Christian  bap- 
tism, Ambrose  again  teaches  that  the  essential 
nature  of  baptism  under  the  Law  and  under 
the  Gospel  is  a  condition  of  purification. 

8.  Cyril,  Archbishop  of  Jerusalem,  in  his  ad- 
dress to  the  candidates  for  baptism,  sa3's:  "Re- 
joice, O  heavens!  and  be  glad,  O  earth!  be- 
cause of  those  who  are  about  to  be  sprinkled 
with  hyssop,  and  to  be  purified  by  the  spiritual 
hyssop,  through  the  power  of  Him  who  drank, 
in  his  suffering,  from  the  hyssop  and  the  reed  " 
(p.  188). 

Cyril  speaks  of  the  rite  of  baptism,  which  he 
was  about  to  administer,  in  the  same  terms  that 
describe  Jewish  baptisms.  The  resemblance 
which  he  traced  between  Jcwisli  and  Christian 
baptism  did  not  consist  in  the  act  or  mode,  but 
in  the  essential  nature,  of  the  baptism,  which 
was  a  condition  of  puriiication. 


Examples  of  Usage  41 

BAPTISM  BY  HEIFER-ASHES. 

1.  Sirach,  xxxiv.  30,  more  than  200  B.C.,  speak- 
ing of  the  purification  from  the  defilement  caused 
by  touching-  a  dead  body,  calls  the  purification 
a  baptism  :  "  Being  baptized  from  a  dead  body, 
and  touching  it  again,  what  is  he  benefited  by 
his  cleansing?  "  (•' Jud.  Bap.,"  p.  112). 

This  purification  is  described  in  Numbers, 
chapter  xix.,  as  a  purification  effected  by  sprink- 
ling the  ashes  of  a  heifer  on  the  person  cere- 
monially defiled, 

2.  Josephus,  "Jewish  Antiquities,"  IV.  iv.  6: 
"  Those,  therefore,  defiled  by  a  dead  body,  in- 
troducing a  little  of  the  ashes  and  hyssop- 
branch  into  a  spring,  and  •  baptizing  of  this 
ashes  [introduced]  into  the  spring,  they  sprinkled 
both  on  the  third  and  seventh  of  the  days " 
("  Jud.  Bap.,"  p.  100). 

3.  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  in  his  comment  on  Isa, 
iv.  4,  says  :  "  The  Creator  and  Lord  of  all,  who 
is  abundant  in  mere}',  .  .  .  will  wash  away  the 
filth  of  the  transgressors,  and  will  thoroughly 
cleanse  the  blood  from  their  midst  by  the  spirit 
of  judgment  and  the  spirit  of  burning.  .  .  . 
We  call  the  spirit  of  burning  the  grace  at 
the  holy  baptism  begotten   within  us   not    with- 


4  2      The  Aleaniug  and  Power  cf  Baptism. 

out  the  Spirit;  for,  indeed,  zve  have  not  been  BAP- 
TIZED by  bare  zoater,  nor  yet  by  the  ashes  of  a 
heifer,  (since  we  liave  been  sprinkled  for  the 
purification  of  the  llesh  onl}-,  according  to  the 
sa3-ing  of  the  blessed  Paul),  but  by  the  Holy 
Spirit  and  by  tlie  divine  and  spirit nal  fire  "  (Dale, 
MS.) 

The  punctuation  of  this  passage  is  that  of 
C3rirs  GrecK  text  as  given  by  the  Abba  Migne, 
of  Paris.  In  this  passage  Cyril  speaks  of  thj-ee 
baptisms,  differing  from  each  other  as  the  agen- 
cies by  which  they  were  effected  were  different. 
T/ie  first  baptism  is  by  mere  or  bare  water  ;  the 
seeond,  by  heifer-ashes ;  the  third,  by  the  con- 
j(jint  agency  of  the  Moly  Spirit  and  the  divine 
and    spiritual    fire. 

4.  Gregcjr^'  Nazianzen :  "  Therefore  let  us  be 
baptized,  that  we  may  overcome  ;  let  us  partake 
of  the  purifying  waters,  more  purging  than 
hyssop,  more  purifying  than  the  blood  of  the 
Law,  more  sanctifying  than  tlie  ashes  of  a 
heifer  sprinkling  the  unclean,  and  having,  for 
tlie  time,  power  for  the  purification  of  the  body, 
but  not  for  the  complete  removal  of  sin" 
("  jud.  Bap.,"  p.  188). 

In  the  comparis(jn  which  this  Greek  writer 
makes  between  the  Jewish  purifications  by  sprink- 


Examples  of  Usage.  43 

ling  sacrificial  blood  and  heifer-ashcs  and  the 
baptism  of  Christianity,  he  teaches  that  the 
former  only  purifies  the  body  cercraoniall)^ 
while  the  latter  is  superior,  more  purifying,  a 
purification  of  the   most  complete   character, 

5.  CN'ril  of  Alexandria:  "The  ancient  law 
.  .  .  preached  the  grace  in  the  holy  baptism. 
For  He  said  (Num.  viii.  ^,7)'.  '  Take  the  Levites, 
and  cleanse  them.  And  thus  shalt  thou  do  to 
cleanse  them  :  Sprinkle  water  of  purifying  upon 
them.'  What  the  water  of  purifying  is  the  most 
wise  Paul  shall  teach,  sa3-ing :  '  The  ashes  of  a 
heifer  sprinkling  the  unclean  sanctifieth  to  the 
purifying    of   the    flesh.'  " 

This  passage  is  repeated  here  because  Cyril 
represents  purification  by  sprinkling  the  ashes 
of  a  heifer  as  one  of  the  things  in  the  ancient 
law   which   give   a  shadow   or  type   of  baptism. 

DIRECT  ASSERTIONS. 

The  Patrists  te.ich  by  direct  assertion  that 
baptism  signifies  purification. 

I.  Athanasius:  "'He  shall  baptize  you  by  the 
Holy  Ghost.'  Tliis  means  that  he  will  purify 
you  "  ("  C.  and  P.  B.,"  p.  600). 

This  is  a  direct  assertion  of  this  Greek  writer 
that  baptisin  means  purification. 


44      The  Meaning  arid  Pozver  of  Baptism. 

2.  Clemens  Romanus :  "I  am  fully  persuaded 
that  the  holy  baptism  of  Christ  is  spiritual  purifi- 
cation and  regeneration  both  of  soul  and  body  " 

(P-  597)- 

3.  Theophylact :  "  He  calls  his  death  a  baptism, 
as  being  a  purging  of  us  all  "  ("Jud.  Bap.,"  p.  217). 

4.  Basil  the  Great:  "  What  is  the  purport  and 
power  of  baptism?  The  baptized  is  thoroughly 
changed  as  to  thought  and  word  and  deed,  and 
becomes,  according  to  the  power  bestowed,  the 
same  as  that  by  which  he  was  born  "  ("  C.  and  P. 
B.,"  p.  491). 

Basil  defines  baptism  as  a  thorough  change  in 
the  spiritual  condition  of  the  baptized,  by  which 
his  character  is  assimilated  to  the  nature  of  the 
baptizing  agency.  He  says  nothing  of  dipping 
or  of  any  other  act.  Baptism  is  a  change  in  the 
character  of  its  object,  the  nature  of  the  change 
being  determined  by  the  nature  of  the  baptizing 
power. 

5.  Hippolytus :  "As  Isaiah  says,  'Wash  ye.' 
Dost  thou  see,  beloved,  how  the  prophet  declared 
beforehand  the  purifying  character  of  this  bap- 
tism ?  "  ("  Jud.  Bap.,"  p.  27S). 

6.  Gregory  Nazianzen,on  Baptism,  says  :  "  But 
we  being  twofold,  I  mean  spiritual  and  corporeal; 
.     .    ,    purification  is  also  twofold,  by  water  and 


Examples  of  Usage.  45 

Spirit,    .    ,     .    the  one  typical,  the  other  real,  and 
purifyinw-  the  depths"  ("  C.  and    P.    B.,"  p.  342). 

7.  Basil  the  Great:  "There  are  three  mean- 
ings of  baptism  :  purification  from  defilement,  re- 
generation by  the  Spirit,  and  trial  by  the  fire  of 
judgment"  ("  Jud.  Bap.,"  p.  249). 

Each  of  these  three  baptisms  is  a  change  of 
condition  corresponding  to  the  nature  of  the 
baptizing  power.  Purification  is  a  condition  of 
purity,  regeneration  a  condition  of  new  spiritual 
life,  and  trial  by  the  fire  of  judgment  a  test  of 
our  condition  to  enter  Paradise. 

8.  Clemens  Alexandrinus :  "Being  baptized, 
we  are  illuminated.  .  .  .  This  is  variously 
designated.  ...  It  is  called  washing  because 
we  are  cleansed  from  our  sins  "  ("  C.  and  P.  B.," 

P-  553)- 

9.  Theophylact,  in  his  comment  on  Luke  xi.  38  : 
"  He  marvelled  that  he  was  not  first  baptized 
before  dinner,"  sa)'s :  "Jesus,  dci'iding  their 
foolish  custom — I  mean  their  purifying  them- 
selves before  eating — teaches  that  they  ought  to 
purify  their  souls  by  good  works "  (Dr.  E. 
Beecher,  p.  222). 

10.  Theophylact,  on  John  iii.  25,  says  :  "  Dis- 
puting concerning  purification — i.e.,  baptism — 
they  came  to  their  Master"  (pp.  214,  221). 


46      The  Meaning  and  Power  0/ Bapiisju. 

BAPTISM  BY  THE  EXTENDED  HAND. 

1.  John  of  U.iniascus:  '•  John  was  baptized  by 
putting  iii^  iKind  upon  the  divine  head  of  his 
Master"  ("Joiiannic  Baptism,"  p.  220). 

This  baptism  was  effected  by  the  touch  of  the 
hand.  The  baptismal  virtue  was  thus  conveyed 
from  Jesus  to  John. 

2.  Hippolytus:  "He  bowed  his  head  to  be 
baptized  by  John  "  (p.  222). 

The  act  of  bowing  the  head  to  receive  baptism 
is  customary  among  all  except  immersionists. 

3.  Gregory  Thaumaturgus  :  "  The  Baptist  hav- 
ing heard  these  things,  stretching  out  his  trem- 
bHng  hand,  baptized  the  Lord  "  (p.  405). 

BAPTISM  OF  TEARS. 

I.  Clemens  Alexandrinus  :  "  He  w^ept  bitterly. 
.  ,  .  Having  been  baptized  a  second  time  b}' 
his  tears"  ("  C.  and  P.  B.,"  p.  514). 

Clement  is  speaking  of  the  captain  of  a  band 
of  robbers,  once  a  disciple  of  the  Apostle  John, 
and  he  calls  his  restoration  a  baptism  of  tears. 
His  second  baptism  was  a  thorough  cliange  in  the 
spiritual  condition  of  his  soul  through  penitential 
scjrrow  for  his  sin.  In  this  baptism  a  dipping  is 
impossible.       It    would     exhaust    the    laclu-ymal 


Examples  of  Usage.  47 

fountains  of  many  men  to  furnish  a  sufficient 
quantity  of  tears  to  immerse  a  single  indivi- 
dual. 

2.  Gregory  Nazianzen :    "And    1    know  yet  a 
fifth    baptism,    that    by    means    of    tears,     .     . 
washing  nightly  his  bed  with  tears  "  (p.  507). 

The  bed  was  not  dipped  in  tears,  neither  was 
the  penitent  man,  weeping  on  account  of  his  sins. 
His  penitential  sorrow  was  a  purification  of  the 
soul,  a  thorough  change  of  his  character,  state,  or 
condition. 

3.  Athanasius :  "  A  sixth  baptism  is  that  by 
tears,  which  is  painful,  as  one  washing  nightly  his 
couch  and  repenting  "  (p.  514). 

The  baptism  was  the  change  of  character  by 
repentance. 

4.  Athanasius:  "  God  has  granted  to  the  nature 
of  man  three  baptisms  purifying  from  all  sin 
whatsoever.  I  mean  .  .  .  third,  the  baptism 
by  tears  into  which  the  harlot  was  purified.  And 
likewise  Peter,  the  chief  of  the  holy  Apostles, 
after  hi.s  denial,  having  wept,  was  received  and 
saved  "  (p.  514). 

Peter  was  not  dipped  in  water  when  he  wept 
over  his  denial  of  his  Master.  His  baptism  of 
tears  was  his  repentance — a  change  in  his  spiri- 
tual   character.      This    Greek    writer    thus    ex- 


48       The  Uleaiiing  and  Poiuer  of  Baptism. 

prcssly  teaches  that  this  baptism  was  a  purifica- 
tion, and  both  of  his  examples  illustrate  this 
siijnification. 


BAPTISM  IN  ONE'S  OWN  BLOOD. 

No  man  can  be  dipped  in  his  own  blood.  By 
the  baptism  of  blood  the  Patrists  mean  purifica- 
tion. 

1.  Basil  Magnus:  ''There  are  some  who,  in 
striving  for  piety,  have  undergone  death  for 
Christ,  .  .  .  needing  for  salvation  nothing  of 
the  water-symbols,  being  baptized  by  their  own 
blood  "  ("  Johannic  Baptism,"  p.  225). 

Basil  did  not  believe  water-baptism  essential  to 
salvation.  He  calls  it  a  symbol.  He  believed  a 
man  can  be  baptized  in  his  own  blood.  He  be- 
lieved men  can  be  saved  by  the  baptism  of 
blood. 

2.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem:  "The  Saviour  redeem- 
ing the  world  by  the  cross,  and  wounded  in  his 
side,  shed  forth  water  and  blood  ;  that  some,  in 
times  of  peace,  might  be  baptized  with  water,  and- 
others,  in  times  of  persecution,  might  be  baptized 
with  their  own  blood  "  (p.  224). 

There  was  no  dipping  in  this  baptism.  A  man 
cannot  be  dipped  in   his  own  blood.      Mis  body 


Examples  of  Usage.  49 

cannot  be  covered  over  with  his  own  blood. 
There  is  not  blood  enough  in  a  man  to  immerse 
him  in  it.  In  this  baptism  a  dipping-  is  impos- 
sible. 

3.  John  of  Damascus:  "John  was  baptized 
.  .  .  also  by  his  own  blood  "   (p.  223). 

We  know  how  this  baptism  was  effected.  His 
head  was  severed  from  his  body  by  order  of 
Herod.  He  w^as  not  dipped  in  his  blood  ;  he 
was  beheaded. 

4.  Jerome  :  "  Thou  dost  baptize  me  with  water, 
that  I  may  baptize  thee,  for  myself,  with  thy 
blood"  (p.  228). 

5.  Tertullian  :  "  Because  he  would  teach  men 
to  be  baptized  not  only  by  water,  but  also  by 
their  own  blood  ;  so  that,  baptized  by  this  bap- 
tism only,  they  ma}^  secure  a  true  faith  and  a  pure 
cleansing,  and,  baptized  in  the  one  way  or  in  the 
other,  equall}^  to  secure  one  baptism  of  salvation 
and  honor  "  ("  C.  and  P.  B.,"  p.  38). 

Thus  Tertullian  teaches  that  baptism  is  a 
cleansing,  and  that  blood-baptism  and  w^ater- 
baptism  are  one  baptism,  which  shows  that  dip- 
ping was  not  the  idea  in  his  mind,  but  spiritual 
condition. 

6.  Augustine  teaches  that  even  in  a  blood)' 
death  there  is  no  baptism  unless  the  character  of 


50     ■  The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

the  person  is  duly  changed.  "  If  all  who  ai'C  slain 
are  baptized  by  their  blood,  all  robbers,  un- 
just and  impious  persons  who  arc  put  to  death 
must  be  reckoned  martyrs,  because  thc}^  are  bap- 
tized by  their  own  blood." 

This,  he  says,  cannot  be.  "  If  none  arc  bap- 
tized by  their  own  blood  but  those  who  are  slain 
for  righteousness  ..."  The  baptism  depends 
upon  the  character  of  the  person  slain.  It  does 
not  depend  upon  the  quantity  of  blood  in  his 
veins,  or  on  the  possibility  of  dipping  him  in  his 
own  blood.  If  it  did,  a  robber  might  be  baptized 
in  his  blood  as  well  as  a  martyr,  which  Augustine 
denies.  The  reality  of  the  martyr-baptism  de- 
pends on  the  spiritual  condition  of  the  person  Avho 
suffers  death.  "  If  you  die  as  a  sacrilegious  per- 
son, how  are  you  baptized  with  your  blood?" 
p.  40). 

7.  Bassillius,  speaking  of  the  forty  martyrs,  says  : 
"  They  were  baptized,  not  witli  water,  but  with 
their  own  blood  "  ("  Baptismal  Question,"  p.  104). 

8.  Cyprian :  "  The  Lord  declares  that  those 
baptized  with  their  own  blood  obtain  divine 
grace,  when  he  says  to  the  thief  on  the  cross  in 
his  very  Passion  that  '  he  should  be  Vv'ith  him  in 
Paradise'  "  ("  C.  and  I\  B.,"  p.  510). 

The  baptism  t^f  the  thief  on  the  cross  was  not 


Examples  of  Usage.  5 1 

a  dipping.  He  was  not  dipped  in  his  own  blood. 
He  was  nailed  to  the  cross.  By  his  faith  in  the 
divine  Redeemer  he  obtained  divine  grace  in  liis 
crucifixion-baptism. 

9.  Cyprian :  "  Can  the  power  of  baptism  be 
greater  or  better  than  confession,  than  martyrdom, 
when  one  confesses  Christ  before  men,  and  is  bap- 
tized by  his  own  blood?"  (''  Johannic  Baptism," 
p.  227). 

10.  Origcn:.  "  If  God  would  grant  to  me  that  I 
might  be  cleansed  by  my  own  blood,  that  I  might 
attain  that  second  baptism  dying  for  Christ,  I 
would  depart  out  of  this  world  secure"  ("Jud. 
Bap.,"  p.  197). 

Dying  for  Christ  was  the  martyr-baptism,  and 
this  baptism  consisted  in  being  cleansed. 

11.  Jerome:  "That  ye  should  be  baptized  by 
my  blood  by  the  washing  of  regeneration,  which 
alone  can  remit  sin  "  ("  C.  and  P.  B.,"  p.  512). 

12.  Athanasius:  "  God  hath  granted  to  the  na- 
ture of  man  three  baptisms  purifying  from  all 
manner  of  sin ;  I  refer  to  that  which  is  through 
water,  and  again  that  which  is  through  our  own 
martyr-blood,  and,  third,  that  which  is  through 
tears  "  (p.  42). 

The  three  baptisms  here  described  are  purifi- 
cations, and  Llie  baptismal  agencies  instrLunenlal 


5  2       The  Meaning  and  Poivcr  of  Baptism. 

in    effecting   these    baptisms    are    water,  martyr- 
blood,  and  tears. 

CHRIST'S  BLOOD-BAPTISM. 

The  baptism  of  Christ  on  the  cross  was  the 
central  baptism  in  which  all  other  Bible  baptisms 
meet.  It  was  a  purification  by  atonement  for  the 
sins  of  mankind. 

1.  Gregory  Nazianzen  :  "  And  I  know  a  fourth 
baptism — that  by  means  of  martyrdom  and  blood, 
with  which,  also,  Christ  himself  was  baptized, 
and,  indeed,  much  more  admirable  than  the 
otiiers  "  ("  C.  and  P.  B.,"  p.  507). 

Agency,  and  not  mode,  is  here  expressed. 

2.  Petilianus :  "  The  Saviour  himself,  also, 
having  been  lirst  baptized  by  John,  declared  that 
he  must  be  baptized  a  second  time — not  now  by 
water  nor  b}^  Spirit,  but  by  the  baptism  of  blood, 
b}'  the  cross  of  his  Passion  "  (p.  40). 

The  blood  was  the  baptizing  agency  in  his  bap- 
tism on  the  cross. 

3.  John  of  Damascus :  "  The  baptism  through 
blood  and  martyrdom  with  which  Christ  was 
baptized  for  us  "  (p.  43). 

The  Saviour's  baptism  was  vicarious.  He  was 
baptized,  not  for  himself,  but  for  us. 

4.  Thcophylact  :  "  Me  calls  liis  death  a  baptism, 


Examples  of  Usage.  53 

as   being  a  purification  for  us  all  "   (Cremer,  p. 
105). 

The  baptism  of  Clirist  on  the  cross  was  on  our 
account.  It  is  called  a  baptism,  not  because  it 
was  a  dipping-,  but  a  purification.  Jesus  was 
not  immersed  on  the  cross,  but  he  was  baptized. 
This  is  a  direct  assertion  of  this  Greek  writer  that 
the  baptism  of  Christ  on  the  cross  was  a  purifica- 
tion. 

5.  Orii^en:  "The  Lord  says:  '  I  have  a  baptism 
to  be  baptized  with.  .  .  .'  You  see  that  he 
called  the  pouring  out  of  his  blood,  baptism " 
("C.  and  P.  B.,"  p.  41). 

Not  immersion  in  his  blood,  but  the  pouring  out 
of  his  blood  {profusioitan  sangjiiuis  sui  BAPTISMA  . 

6.  Tcrtullian  :  "  These  two  baptisms  he  shed 
forth  from  the  wound  of  his  pierced  side  "  (p. 
510). 

Tlie  idea  that  Jesus  was  immersed  either  in 
the  water  or  in  the  blood  that  flowed  from  the 
wound  in  his  side  is,  of  course,  wholly  inadmissi- 
ble. 

7.  Jerome :  "  That  ye  should  be  baptized  by 
my  blood,  which  alone  can  remit  sin  "  (p.  512). 

It  was  the  sin-remitting  power  of  Christ's 
blood  which  gave  it  its  virtue  and   efficacy. 

8.  TertuUian:    "  Martvrdom    will    be    another 


54      The  ]\Icaning  and  Ponwr  of  Baptism. 

baptism.  For  He  says  (Luke  xii.  50) :  '  I  have 
also  another  baptism.'  Whence  from  the  wound- 
ed side  of  the  Lord  water  and  blood  flowed 
forth,  providing  each  washing:  .  .  .  first,  wash- 
ing  by   water;  second,   by  blood"   (p.   510). 

Here  we  have  TertuUian's  own  explanation 
of  both  of  the  baptisms.  The  water  and  the 
blood  are  two  baptismal  agencies,  each  of  which 
effects  a  cleansing.  The  mode  has  nothing  what- 
ever to  do  with  the  nature  of  the  baptism. 

9.  Petilianus :  "Blush,  O  persecutors!  3'e  make 
martja-s  like  to  Christ,  whom  [quos],  after  the 
water  of  true  baptism,  baptizing  blood  sprinkles  " 
(p.  40). 

The  baptismal  virtue  is  in  the  blood.  The 
blood  of  Christ  has  an  atoning  efhcacy,  a  sin- 
remitting  power,  and  the  sprinkling  of  this 
blood    baptizes,   cleanses   from    sin, 

10.  Origcn  :  "  Christ,  whom  we  follow,  shed 
his  blood  for  our  redemption,  that  we  may  de- 
part washed  by  our  own  blood.  For  it  is  the 
baptism  of  blood  only  which  can  make  us  purer 
than  the  baptism  of  water  has  made  us"  (p.  41).  ' 

The  baptism  of  water  is  a  purification.  The 
baptism  of  blood  is  a  more  complete  purilica- 
tion.  Y\nd  this  cleansing  comes  to  us  through 
the   baptism  of  Christ  on  the  cross,   which    was 


Examples  of  Usage.  55 

n  purification  for  us.  The  idea  of  a  covering  of 
the  body  either  with  water  or  with  the  blood 
that  flowed  from  the  Saviour's  side  is  no  part 
of  the  baptism.  The  bnptisni  is  an  effect  pro- 
duced by  these  agencies,  a  purification  for  our 
sins.  Christ's  baptism  on  the  cross  was  "  a  bap- 
tism into  penal  death,"  an  atonement  for  the  sins 
of  mankind. 

THE  BAPTISM   OF   FIRE. 

One  of  the  effects  of  fire  arises  from  its  puri- 
fying efficacy.  This  purifi jatioa  by  fire  the  Pa- 
ti  ists  call  baptism. 

1.  Ambrose:  "There  is  also  a  baptism  at 
the  entrance  of  Paradise  which  formerly  did 
not  exist ;  but  after  the  transgressor  was  ex- 
cluded, the  flaming  sword  began  to  be,  which 
was  not  before  when  sin  was  not.  Sin  began 
and  baptism  began,  by  which  they  might  be 
purified  who  desired  to  return"  ("  Jud.  Bap.," 
p.  223). 

2.  Origen  :  "  Physicians  say  that  to  cure 
certain  diseases  not  onl}^  is  the  cutting  by  a 
knife  necessar}^  but  burning,  also.  .  .  .  Our 
sin  is  a  cancer  for  which  neither  cutting  nor 
burning,    alone,    is   sufficient;    both   are    needed. 

.  .  .  Therefore  the  Saviour  uses  both  sword  and 


56       The  Mea7iing  and  Powoi^  of  Baptism. 

fire,  and  baptizes  those  sins  which  could  not  be 
purged  b}^  the  purification  of  the  Holy  Spirit  " 
("C.  and  P.  B.,"  595). 

The  only  possible  meaning  of  the  word  "  bap- 
tizes" here  is  purifies,  cleanses. 

3.  Ambrose  :  "  Who  is  it  that  baptizes  b}'  this 
fire  ?  .  .  .  Therefore  the  great  Baptist  \bap~ 
tista,  purifier]  .  .  .  shall  come,  and  shall  see 
many  standing  at  the  entrance  of  Paradise,  and 
shall  wave  the  sword  turning  every  way.  .  .  . 
Therefore  consuming  fire  must  come  and  burn  up 
in  us  the  lead  of  iniquity,  the  iron  of  transgres- 
sion, and  make  us  pure  gold  "  (p.  520). 

4.  Basil  the  Great:  "Baptized  by  the  fire — that 
is,  by  the  word  of  doctrine "  ("'Johannic  Bap- 
tism," p.  201). 

Basil,  by  his  definition  of  this  fire-baptism, 
makes  it,  not  a  dipping  into  the  fire,  but  an  ef- 
fect of  the  instrumentality  of  the  fire — that  is,  the 
doctrine. 

5.  Jerome :  "  Happy  is  he  who  receives  the 
cleansing  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  does  not  need  the 
cleansing  of  fire.  But  wretched  and  worthy 
of  vreeping  is  lie  who,  after  the  cleansing 
of  the  Spirit,  must  be  baptized  by  fire  "  (p. 
201). 

6.  Macarius  ^Egyptus :    "  The   baptism    of  fire 


Examples  of  Usage.  57 

and  of  Spirit   purifies  and  cleanses   the  polluted 
mind  "  (p.  207). 

7.  Gregory  Thaumaturgus :  "Christ  says  to 
John:  'Baptize  me,  who  am  about  to  baptize 
those  who  believ^e,  tJinmgh  water,  and  the  Spirit, 
and  fire  '■ — by  zvatcr,  which  is  able  to  wash  away 
the  filth  of  sin;  by  the  Spirit,  who  can  make  the 
earthly  spiritual ;  /;/  Jirc,  whose  nature  it  is  to 
burn  up  the  thorns  of  sin"  (p.  237). 

Water,  Spirit,  and  fire  are  agencies  by  which 
the  purification  is  accomplished. 

8.  Gregory  Nazianzen :  "  And  there  is  a  final 
baptism  hereafter,  when  they  will  be  baptized  b}- 
means  of  fire,  both  more  painful  and  more  pro- 
tracted "  C'C.  and  P.  B.,"  p.  507). 

This  baptism  is  not  a  mere  momentary  act,  a 
dipping  into  the  fire  ;  it  is  a  condition  or  state  of 
long,  indefinite  duration. 

9.  Athanasius :  "  The  eighth  baptism  is  the 
final  baptism,  which  is  not  saving,  but  burning 
and  punishing  sinners  for  ever  and  ever  "  (p.  507). 

This  is  a  destructive  baptism,  a  condition 
which  has  no  termination. 


HAND-WASHING   BAPTISM. 

I.   Clemens  Alexandrinus  :  "  Purity  is  to  think 


58       The  Meaning  ajid  Power  cf  Bapiism. 

purely.     An  image  of  this  baptism  ^vas  communi- 
cated to  the  poets,  from  Moses,  thus  : 
"'Having  washed,  and  being  clothed  with  clean 
vestments, 

Penelope  comes  to  prayer,' 
*  But  Telemachus     .     .     , 

Having    washed   his   hands    of    the    hoary   sea, 

prays  to  IMinerva.' 
"This  is  a  custom  of  the  Jews  to  baptize  often 
upon  the  couch.     Therefore  it  is  well  said  : 

"  '  Be  pure,  not  b}^  washing,  but  by  thinking  '  " 
("Jud.  Bap.,"  p.  176). 

A  condition  of  mental  purity  is  a  baptism. 
Clement  calls  it  "  this  baptism."  A  condition  of 
ceremonial  purity,  a  baptism  by  washing  the 
hands,  as  done  b}^  Telemachus,  is  a  symbol,  "  an 
image,"  of  this  baptism,  which  the  heathen  poets 
learned  from  Moses.  This  hand-washing  bap- 
tism was  a  frequent  practice,  he  says,  among  the 
Jews.  The  couch  on  which  the  Jews  were  accus- 
tomed thus  to  baptize  was  the  dining  couch,  the 
triclinium  on  which  they  reclined  at  meals. 

2.  Thcophylact,  in  his  comment  on  Luke  xi,  38, 
where  Jesus  reproves  the  Pharisee  who  "  mar- 
velled that  he  was  not  first  baptized  before  din- 
ner," says:  "Jesus,  deriding  their  foolish  custom — 
I  mean  their  purifying  themselves  before  eating — 


Examples  of  Usage.  59 

teaches  that  they  ought  to  purify  their  souls  by 
good  works;  for  washing  the  hands  by  ivater  puri- 
fies the  body  onl}^,  not  the  soul"  (Beecher,  p. 
222;  Dale,  "Johannic  Bap.,"  p.  117). 

3.  Origeii:  "The  word  of  the  precept,  trul}', 
with  the  feet,  orders  the  washing  with  internal 
water,  announcing  figurativel}''  the  sacrament  of 
baptism"  ("  Jud.  Bap.,"  p.  175). 

4.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  :  "  The  high-priest  first 
washes,  then  sacrifices  ;  for  Aaron  was  first  washed, 
then  became  high-priest.  For  how  could  he  be 
permitted  to  pray  for  others  who  was  not  first 
cleansed  by  water?  And  the  laver  placed  within 
the  tent  was  a  symbol  of  baptism  "  (p.  175). 

The  design  of  the  water  in  the  laver  was  fi)r 
the  cleansing  of  the  high-priests.  But  they  were 
not  immersed  in  the  laver;  the  water  was  taken 
out  of  the  laver  for  use  in  their  cleansing. 

Dr.  William  Smith,  in  his  "  Dictionary  of  the 
Bible,"  edited  by  Professor  H.  B.  Hackett,  Vol. 
IV.  p.  2877,  says  that  "  the  water  was  drawn  out 
b}^  taps  from  the  laver,  so  that  the  priests  might 
be  said  to  wash  '  at,'  not  *  in,'  it."  Lightfoot, 
quoted  on  the  same  page,  cites  Jewish  testimony 
making  "  twelve  cocks  (epistomia)  for  drawing 
off  the  water."  The  Septuagint  translation  of 
Exodus  XXX.  19  teaches  that  the  water  was  used 


6o      The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism, 

for  washing  the  hands  and  feet  of  the  priests,  not 
in  the  laver,  but  out  of  it.  "  Aaron  and  his  sons 
shall  wash  their  hands  and  feet  with  water  out  of 
ity  The  water  was  taken  "  out"  of  the  laver  for 
the  washing.  The  English  version  likewise  sa^-s  : 
"  They  shall  wash  their  hands  and  feet  thereat" 
The  Septuagint  employs  the  word  iiipto  to  denote 
the  washing  of  the  priests  in  Ex.  xxx.  19,  a 
word  that  never  means  "  dip."  The  Septuagint 
also  employs  the  instrumental  dative  "  with  Wvi- 
ter. "  This  is  the  more  significant  in  contrast 
with  the  preposition  ijtto  in  the  previous  vci'sc: 
"Pour  water  into  it"  (the  laver).  Cvi"il  also 
uses  the  preposition  eiia,  which  denotes  tlie  means 
of  cleansing — "  cleansed  by  water."  The  water  was 
not  the  element  into  zuhich  they  were  dipped,  but 
the  means  by  wJiich  they  were  cleansed. 

CIRCUMCISION   BAPTISM. 

Circumcision  and  baptism  both  denote  purifica- 
tion. The  Patrists,  therefore,  call  circumcision 
baptism. 

I.  Justin  Martyr:  "Wash  you  and  be  clean; 
and  put  away  iniquities  from  vour  souls,  as  God 
commanded  3'ou  to  wash  this  washing  and  to 
circumcise  the  true  circumcision.  .  .  .  What 
need,  then,  have  I  of  circumcision,  who  have  re- 


Examples  of  Usage.  6 1 

ceived  witness  from  God?  What  need  is  there 
of  that  baptism  for  me,  who  have  been  baptized 
by  the  Holy  Spirit?"  ("  C.  and  P.  B.,"  p. 
540).  Justin  calls  it  "that  baptism,"  yet  in  it 
there  was  neither  dipping,  nor  pouring,  nor 
sprinkling. 

2.  Chrysostom,  Hom.  xl:  "There  was  pain 
and  trouble  in  the  practice  of  that  Jewish  cir- 
cumcision ;  but  our  circumcision — I  mean  the 
grace  of  baptism — gives  cure  without  pain,  and 
this  for  infants  as  well  as  men "  (Taylor's 
"  Apostolic  Baptism,"  p.  74). 

3.  Justin  Martyr:  "  We  Gentile  Chi'istians  .  .  . 
have  not  received  tiiat  circumcision  which  is 
according  to  the  flesh,  but  that  circumcision 
which  is  spiritual.  .  .  .  We  have  received 
this  circumcision  in  baptism"  ("Bib.  Sacra," 
Vol.  XV.  p.  75). 

4.  Cyril :  "  We  receive  the  spiritual  seal,  be- 
ing circumcised  through  washing  by  the  Tloly 
Spirit.  .  .  By  the  circumcision  of  Christ 
being  buried  with  him  by  baptism"  ("  Jud. 
Bap.,"  p.  207). 

5.  Origen:  "Christ  came  and  gave  to  us  the 
second  circumcision  by  the  baptism  of  regenera- 
tion, and  purged  our  souls  "  (p.  207). 


62       The  Meaning  and  Pozuei'  of  Baptism. 

WATER  BAPTIZED    BY   THE   HOLY   SPHHT. 

•  The  Patrists  did  not  believe  tliat  mere  water  in 
its  natural  state,  in  any  mode  of  its  use,  could  effect 
Christian  baptism.  They  believed  that  the  water 
must  first  be  baptized —/.<^.,  purified — by  the  Holy 
Spirit,  and,  having-  thus  received  a  divine,  spiri- 
tual quality,  it  could  eflect  Christian  baptism  in 
whatever  mode  applied.  In  this  they  deviated 
from  the  Bible  teaching',  which  is  that  water-bap- 
tism is  only  a  symbol  of  the  baptism  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.  Yet  the  main  idea  which  pervades  all 
their  v/ritings,  that  baptism  signifies  purification,, 
here  applies  in  all  its  force. 

1.  Tertullian  :  "It  is  necessary,  also,  that  the 
water  be  purified  and  sanctified  first  by  the  priest, 
that  it  may  be  able  by  ITS  OWN  baptism  to  cleanse 
the  sins  of  the  baptized  man.  For  the  Lord  sa3'S, 
through  the  prophet  Ezekiel,  'And  I  will  sprinkle 
you  with  pure  water,  and  I  will  purify  you '  " 
("C.  and  P.  B.,"  p.  541). 

By  being  "  purified  and  sanctified,"  the  water 
is  thoroughly  changed  in  its  character,  and  this' 
purified  condition  is  its  "  BAPTISM." 

2.  Ambrose  :  "  Christ  was  therefore  baptized, 
not  that  he  might  be  sanctified  by  the  waters,  bu* 


Examples  of  Usage.  63 

that  he  might  sanctify  the  ivatcrs,  and  by  his  own 
piuity  purify  the  stream  which  he  touches.  .  .  . 
For  when  the  Saviour  is  washed,  the  whole  water 
is  cleansed /"c^r  our  baptism''  (p.  552). 

3.  Jerome:  "How  is  the  soul  which  has  not 
the  Holy  Spirit  purged  from  old  defilements? 
For  water  does  not  wash  the  soul  unless  it  \s  first 
tvashcd  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  that  it  INIAY  EE  ABLE 
SPIRITUALLY  to  zvash  others  "  (p.  552). 

4.  TertuUian  :  "  For  neither  can  the  Spirit  oper- 
ate without  the  water,  nor  the  water  without  the 
Spirit  "  ("  Jud.  Bap.,"  p.  197). 

The  conjoint  agency  of  both  water  and  the 
Spirit  is  nccessar3\ 

5.  Council  of  Carthage:  ^^ For  zvatcr  only,  unless 
it  have  the  Holy  Spirit  also,  cannot  purge  sins  or 
sanctify  man.  Wherefore  they  must  admit  the 
Holy  Spirit  to  be  there  where  they  say  baptism 
is,  or  that  baptism  is  not  where  the  Holy  Spirit 
is  not ;  for  baptism  cannot  be  zuhere  the  Holy  Spirit 
is  not''  ("C.  and  P.  B.,"  p.  548). 

Dipping  can  be  without  the  Holy  Spirit.  But 
mere  dipping  is  not  Christian  baptism  in  the 
judgment  of  the  Patrists.  Dipping  a  person  in 
mere  natural  water  is  not  Christian  baptism. 
There  can  be  no  baptism  with  w\atcr  unless  the 


64       The  Meaning  and  Poiver  of  Baptism. 

water  itself  is  first  baptized — i.e.,  purified — by 
the  Holy  Spirit,  that  it  may  have  a  baptizing 
power. 

6.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem:  ''Do  not  regard  this 
tvashing  as  by  SIMPLE  tuatcr,  but  as  by  the  spiritual 
grace  given  luith  the  water.  .  .  .  The  siuiple 
water,  receiving  the  invocation  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  of  Christ,  and  of  the  Father,  acquires  the 
POWER  of  sanctification  "  (p.  554), 

The  Holy  Spirit  communicates  a  spiritual  qual- 
ity to  the  water,  giving  the  water  power  to  bap- 
tize.    Merc  water  is  insufficient. 

7.  Cyril  of  Alexandria  :  "  We  have  not  been 
baptized  by  bare  zvater,  .  .  .  but  by  the  Holy 
Spirit." 

8.  Justin  Mart3'r:  "  Isaiah  did  not  send  you  to 
the  bath,  thci-c  to  wash  away  murder  and  other 
sins,  which  7iot  all  the  zvater  of  the  sea  is  sufficient 
to  purify.  ...  Be  baptized  as  to  the  soul  from 
anger,  and  avarice,  and  envy,  and  hate,  and  behold, 
the  body  is  pure  "  (p.  598). 

9.  Jerome :  "  Do  you  offer  to  me  THE  SOUL 
ivashcd  with  SLMPLE  water  ?  .  .  .  The  bap- 
tism of  the  Church  without  the  Holy  Spirit  is 
nothing  "  ("  C.  and  P.  B.,"  p.  513). 

10.  Epiphanius:    "Christ,    baptized    by    Jolin, 


Examples  of  Usage.  65 

came  to  the  waters,  not  needing  washing,  .  .  . 
giving  TW'E'si  power  for  those  who  were  to  be  per- 
fected "  (p.  552). 

11.  Cyril  of  Alexandria  :  "As  water  in  a  cal- 
dron, set  to  the  fire,  receives  the  foixe  of  the  fire, 
so  the  water  ©f  baptism  by  the  Spirit  is  raised  to 
a  divine  and  ineffable  virtue"  ("  Johannic  Bap- 
tism," p.  106). 

12.  Augustine:  "The  Holy  Spirit  works  in 
that  water,  so  that  those  who  before  baptism  were 
guilty  of  many  sins  .  .  .  merit,  after  baptism, 
the  kingdom  of  heaven  "  ("  C.  and  P.  B.,"  p.  555). 

Many  other  examples  are  given  by  Dr.  Dale  in 
his  thorough  discussion  of  this  subject  in  "  Patris- 
tic Baptism."  He  also  traces  to  its  source  the 
error  of  uniting  the  Holy  Spirit  with  the  water  in 
Christian  baptism. 

POURING  BAPTISM. 

1.  Jerome:  "And  I  will  pour  out  [or  sprinkle] 
upon  you  clean  water.  ...  I  will  pour  out 
the  clean  water  of  saving  baptism,  and  I  will 
cleanse  them"  ("  Jud.  Bap.,"  p.  196). 

2.  Basil  JMagnus  :  "  Elias  has  shown  the  power 
of  baptism  by  burning  the  sacrifice  upon  the  altar 
of  burnt-offerings,    not  by  means  of  fire,  but  by 


66       The  Meaning  and  Poiver  of  Juiptism. 

means  of  water,  .  .  .  When  the  water  is 
m3'stically  poured  thrice  upon  the  altar,  the  lire 
begins  and  kindles  into  a  flame,  as  though  it 
were  oil"    ("  C.  and  P.  B.,"  p,  536). 

3.  Origen,on  i  Kings  xviii.  34, where  Elijah  com- 
manded water  to  be  poured  three  times  upon  the 
sacrifice  on  the  altar,  says:  "  But  why  is  it  be- 
lieved that  the  coming  Elias  will  baptize,  when  he 
did  not  baptize  what  needed  cleansing  upon  the 
wood  of  the  altar?  .  .  .  For  he  commanded 
the   priests  to  effect  this   baptism  "  ("  C.  and  P. 

B.,"p.  535)- 

Tlie  baptism  was  a  cleansing  (loutron)  effected 
by  pouring  water.  The  baptism  did  not  consist 
in  the  act  of  pouring,  but  in  the  effect  of  the  water 
which  they  poured.  Baptism  does  not  consist  in 
the  act,  but  in  the  effect  of  the  baptizing  agency. 

4.  Gregory  Nazianzcn  :  "  I  have  three  overflow- 
ings vvdth  which  I  will  purif^^  the  sacrifice,  kind- 
ling fire  by  water"  (p.  536). 

5.  Ambrose:  "Baptism,  like  a  fire,  consumes 
sins,  for  Christ  baptizes  by  fire  a«d  the  Spirit. 
You  read  this  type  in  the  Books  of  the  Kings  (i 
Kings  xviii.  34),  where  Elias  put  v/ood  upon  the 
aUar,  and  said  that  they  should  throw  over  it 
water  from  water-pots.     .     .     .     Thou,    O  man ! 


Examples  of  Usage.  Gy 

art  upon  the  altar,  who  shalt  be  cleansed- by  wa- 
ter" (p.  537.) 

6.  Jerome:  "And  I  will  no  more  pour  out 
upon  them  t!ie  waters  of  saving  baptism,  but 
the  waters  of  doctrine  and  of  the  Word  of  God" 

(P-  534)- 

7.  Ambrose,  on  2  Maccabees  i.  20-36,  "  Nehe- 
rniali  commanded  the  Avater  that  was  left  to  be 
poured  upon  the  great  stones.  When  this  was 
done  there  was  kindled  a  flame.  ...  It  was 
told  the  King  of  Persia  that  Neliemiah  had  puri- 
fied the  sacrifices  therewith,"  sa3's  :  "The  narra- 
tive of  the  preceding  event  .  .  .  betokens 
the   Holy  Spirit  and  Christian  baptism"  (p.  538). 

8.  Bernard,  speaking  of  the  baptism  of  our 
Saviour  by  John,  says:  "The,  creature  pours 
water  on  the  head  of  the  Creator"  (Fairchild,  p. 
63,  note). 

SPRINKLING   BAPTISM, 

I.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  :  "  Thou  seest  the  power 
of  baptism.  Be  of  good  courage,  O  Jerusalem  ! 
The  Lorel  will  take  away  all  thine  iniquities. 
.  .  .  He  x\\\\  sprinkle  upon  you  clean  vrater, 
and  yc  shall  be  purified  from  all  your  sin  "  ("  Jud. 
Bap.,"  p.  196). 


68       The  Meaning  aiid  Pozvcy  cf  Baptism.  \ 

< 

2.  Didyraus  Alexan'drinus :    "The   very  image    \ 

of  baptism  both  continually  illuminated  and  sav-  j 
ed  all  Israel  at  that  time,  ...  as  prophesied 
Ezekiel,  xxxvi.  25  :  '  I  will  sprinkle  clean  water  \ 
upon  you,  and  you  shall  be  clean  from  all  your  ; 
sins';  and  David,  Psalm  1.  9 :  'Sprinkle  me  with  ' 
hyssop,  and  I  shall  be  clean  '  "  (p.  196).  j 

3.  Jerome,  in  his  interpretation  of  Ez.  xxxvi.  25,  i 
thus  expresses  it:  "I  will  pour  out  or  sprinkle 
upon  you  cl-^an  water,"  using  both  words,  cffiui-  \ 
dam  sive  aspcrgani,  showing  that  the  baptism  does  ! 
not  consist  in  the  act,  which  is  a  matter  of  indif-  \ 
ference,  but  in  the  effect."  He  savs :  "  It  is  to  be  \ 
observed  that  a  new  heart  and  a  new  spirit  may  ! 
be  given  by  the  pouring  and  sprinkling  cf  zcater''  \ 
(p.  196).  1 

He  thus  gives  emphasis  to  the  validity  of  pour-  ! 
ing  and  sprinkling  as  modes  of  applying  the  bap- 
tismal agenc}'.  The  baptism  is  a  change  in  the  | 
spiritual  condition  of  the  soul  effected  by  the  J 
pouring  or  sprinkling  of  water.  He  does  not  \ 
mean  that  mere  water  can  save,  for  he  says  in 
anotherplace  :  "Baptism  is  not  without  the  Holy  : 
Spirit"  (•'  C.  and  P.  B."  p.  552). 

4.  Petilianus:  "  Blush,  O  persecutors !  ye  make    j 
martyrs  like  unto  Christ,  whom  [quos],  after  the    \ 


Examples  of  Usage,  69 

water  of  true  baptism,  baptizing  blood  sprinkles  " 
("C.  and  P.  B.,"  p.  40). 

It  is  the  quality  of  the  baptizing  agency  whicii 
efiects  the  baptism,  not  the  mode  of  its  applica- 
tion.    It  can  be  applied  by  sprinkling. 

5.  Ambrose,  on  2  Mac.  i.  20-36,  where  we  read, 
"  When  the  sacrifices  were  laid  on,  Nehemiah 
commanded  the  priest's  to  sprinkle  with  the  water 
both  the  wood  and  that  which  lay  upon  it.  When 
this  was  done  .  .  .  there  was  a  great  fire 
kindled,  .  .  '.  the  sacrifice  was  consumed  " — 
commenting  on  this,  Ambrose  says  :  "  The  narra- 
tive of  the  preceding  event,  and  especially  of  the 
sacrifice  offered  by  Nehemiah,  betokens  the 
Holy  Spirit  and  the  baptism  of  Christians "  (p. 
538;  "  Jud.  Bap.,"  p.  346). 

6.  Tertullian,  speaking  of  heathen  nations,  says : 
"  They  everywhere  purif\'  villas,  houses,  temples, 
and  whole  cities  by  sprinkling  water.  .  . 
Here  we  see  the  work  of  the  devil  emulating  the 
things  of  God,  since  he  practises  even  baptism 
among  his  own  people"  ("  C.  and   P.  B."  p.  532). 

7.  Ambrose,  on  clinic  baptism,  which  was  per- 
formed by  sprinkling,  says  :  "  There  are  not  want- 
ing sick  persons  who  arc  baptized,  almost  daily" 
(P-  53^^)- 


70      The  Aleaiiing  and  Pozvcr  of  Baptism.'  \ 

8.  Basil   Magnus,    speaking  of  the  baptism  of 
Arianthens,  wiio    was    baptized    by  liis   wife    by  i 
sprinkling  on  his  death-bed,  calls  it  a  purification  :  { 
"  He  washed  away  all  the  stains  of  his  soul  at  the  | 

.close  of  his  life  by  the  washing  [loutron]  of  re-  I 
generation"  (p.  501). 

9.  The  Codex  Sinaiticus  has  the  word  "  sprin- 
kled "  instead  of  "  baptized  "  in  Mark  vii.  4.  It  \ 
reads  :  "  Except  they  sprinkle  themselves  from  the  ' 
market,"  instead  of  *'  Except  they  baptize  them-  i 
selves"  (Tischendorf,  New  Testament,  Leipsic,  j 
1873).  In  accounting  for  the  variation,  it  must 
be  admitted  that  the  copyist  "  saw  no  dulicult}^  in  : 
a  baptism  being  effected  by  sprinkling." 

10.  Lactantius:  "So,  also,  he  would  save  the  ' 
Gentiles  by  baptism — that  is,  by  the  sprinkling  of  ; 
the  purifying  dew''  ("  Johannic  Baptism,"  p.  317).  j 

11.  Cyprian  quotes  the  following  passages  from  i 
the  Old  Testament  to  prove  that  baptism  by  i 
sprinkling  vv'as  equally  valid  with  other  modes :  ' 
"  The  Holy  Scripture  says,  Ez.  xxxvi.  25,  26:  '  I  ; 
w^ill  sprinkle  clean  water  upon  you,  and  ye  shall  ; 
be  cleansed  from  all  5-our  uncleanness,  and  from  j 
all  vour  idols  wmII  I  cleanse  you;  and  I  wdll  give  i 
a  new  heart  to  you,  and  put  a  new  spirit  within  ; 
you  ' ;  likewise  in  Num.  xix.  8,  12,  13  :    .    .    .    '  He  ! 


Examples  of  Usage.  yi 

shall  not  be  clean,  and  that  soul  shall  be  cut  oil 
from  Israel,  because  the  water  of  sprinkliny^  was 
not  sprinkled  upon  him  ' ;  and  again,  Num.  viii.  5, 
7:  'The  Lord  spake  to  Moses,  saying:  .  .  . 
Thus  shalt  thou  purify  them  :  Thou  shalt  sprinkle 
them  with  the  water  of  purification  '  ;  and  again, 
Num.  xix.  9  :  '  The  water  of  sprinkling  is  purifica- 
tion.' WJicnceit  appears  thai  the  sprinkling  of  water 
POSSESSES  EQUAL  VALUE  with  the  Saving  zvash- 
ing"  ("C.  and  P.  B.,"  p.  524). 


CHAPTER  III. 

SPECIAL   DISCUSSION   OF   SIRACII   XXXIV.    30. 

'T~^HE  view  given  above  is  that  the  purification 
-^       which    Sirach    calls  a  baptism   is   efiected 
wholly  by  the  agency  of  heifer-ashes. 

To  this  view  an  objection  has  been  drawn  from 
Num.  xix.  19:  "And  the  clean  person  shall 
sprinkle  upon  the  unclean  on  the  third  day,  and 
on  the  seventh  day  :  and  on  the  seventh  day  he 
shall  purily  himself,  and  wash  his  clothes,  and 
bathe  himself  in  water,  and  siiall  be  clean  at 
even."  The  objection  is  that  the  purification  con- 
sists either  wholh',  or  chiefly,  or  in  part  in  wash- 
ing the  clothes  and  bathing  in  water. 

But  this  verse  alone  in  itself  is  not  decisive. 
V^iewed  in  itself  alone,  it  admits  of  more  than  one 
interpretation,  and  it  has  received  a  diversity  of 
interpretations.  When  the  meaning  of  a  passage 
is  ambiguous  and  doubtful,  the  rule  of  interpreta- 
tion is  to  resort  to  the  context  and  other  sources 
f(jr  aid  in  ascertaining  its  true  meaning.  That 
this  necessity  exists  in  Num.  xix.  19  is  evident 
72 


special  Discussion  of  Sirach  xxxiv.  30.   ']2i 

■rom   the  diversify  of  interpretation   to  which  it 
has  given  rise. 

I.  Dr.  Fairbairn  ("  Herraeneutical  Manual,"  p. 
298)  explains  the  baptism  of  Sirach  as  referring- 
to  the  "  purification  for  those  who  had  come  into 
contact  with  a  corpse  ;  and  this,  we  learn  from 
Num.  xix.  13,  19,  included  a  threefold  action- 
sprinkling  the  person  with  water  mixed  with  the 
ashes  of  a  red  heifer,  bathing  it,  and  washing  the 
clothes.  Plainl}^  therefore,  the  baptism  of  the 
son  of  Sirach  is  a  general  term  expressive  of  the 
whole  of  these,  ...  all  the  ablutions  prac- 
tised on  the  occasion." 

This  makes  the  baptism  a  purification  ;  but  it 
makes  the  process  a  complex  operation,  "a  three- 
fold action,"  to  which  no  allusion  is  elsewhere 
ever  made, 

2.  Dr.  Gale  makes  the  baptism  consist  chiefly 
in  washing  the  clothes  and  bathing:  "A  further 
washing  is  necessary  besides  the  sprinklings, 
and  this  washing  was  the  finishing  of 
the  ceremony.  The  defiled  person  was  to  be 
sprinkled  with  the  holy  water  on  the  third  and 
on  the  seventh  da}^,  onl}-  as  a  preparatory  to  the 
great  purification,  which  was  to  be  by  washing 
the  body  and  clothes  on  the  seventh  da}'." 

This  interpretation   Dr.   Fairbairn   rejects,  be- 


74      The  JMeaniiig  and  Poiver  of  Baptism. 

cause  it  makes  the  "  bathing  at  the  close  the 
chief  thing,"  while  it  "  was  evidently  one  of  the 
least." 

The  fatal  objection  is  that  it  makes  that  "  the 
great  puriiication  "  which  is  never  spoken  of  else- 
where as  any  part  of  the  purification ;  and  it 
makes  that  "only  a  preparatory  to  the  great  pu- 
rification "  which  is  elsewhere  the  only  thing 
spoken  of  as  the  purification, 

3.  Dr.  Carson  wholly  excludes  the  agency  of 
the  heifer-ashes  from  the  baptism,  and  makes  it 
consist  in  "  immersion  only."  It  is  "his  dipping 
or  baptism''  (pp.  66,  320,  455). 

4.  Dr.  Geo.  D.  Armstrong  ("  The  Doctrine  of 
Baptisms,"  p.  72)  says  that  the  person  who  in 
Num.  xix.  19  was  required  to  "  wash  his  clothes 
and  bathe  himself  in  water,"  was  not  the  person 
upon  whom  the  ashes  were  sprinkled,  but  it  was 
the  person  who  did  the  sprinkling.  Dr.  Arm- 
strong thinks  the  pronoun  "he"  in  the  expres- 
sion, "  he  shall  purify  himself,"  has  for  its  antece- 
dent "  the  clean  person."  and  that  this  person 
sprinkled  the  ashes,  and  then  washed  his  own 
clothes  and  bathed  himself,  and  that  the  man  who 
was  defiled  by  a  dead  body  was  only  required  to 
have  the  heifer-ashes  sprinkled  upon  him. 

But   if  there    be    an    uncertainty  in  the  verse 


special  Discussion  of  Si  rack  xxxiv.  30.   75 

itSclf  respecting  the  antecedent  of  the  pronoun, 
the  context  is  decisive  against  making  the  clean 
person  the  antecedent.  The  clean  person,  after 
sprinkling  the  ashes,  was  only  required  to  "  wash 
his  clothes"  (v.  21),  but  the  other  was  required 
to  ''wash  his  clothes  and  bathe  himself  in  water" 
(v.  19). 

This  interpretation  also  leaves  unsolved  ;he 
quer}^  why  all  the  others  who  came  in  contact 
with  the  heifer-ashes  should  be  required  to  wash 
their  clothes,  and  some  of  them  also  to  bathe, 
while  the  man  on  whom  the  ashes  were  sprinkled 
was  alone  exempt  from  this  requirement.  Would 
not  the  contact  with  the  heifer-ashes  render  the 
use  of  water  as  needful  for  him  as  for  them  ? 

5.  The  interpretation  of  Dr.  Dale  is  that  there 
were  two  different  kinds  of  defilement,  from  two 
different  and  opposite  sources  :  one  from  touch- 
ing a  dead  body,  the  other  from  touching  the 
heifer-ashes  ;  and  that  these  two  different  kinds 
of  defilement  were  removed  respectively  by 
two  different  agencies.  The  defilement  from 
a  dead  body  was  removed  by  heifer-ashes,  the 
defilement  from  the  heifer-ashes  was  removed  by 
water;  and  as  the  person  whose  purification  is 
described  in  Numbers  xix.  19  had  incurred  both 
kinds  of  defilement,  he  needed  both  kinds  of  puri- 


76      The  Meaning  and  Pozvev  of  Baptism. 

fication.  From  the  defilement  he  had  contracted 
by  touching  a  dead  body  he  was  purified  by  the 
heifer-ashes  sprinkled  upon  him.  But  while  the 
ashes  had  power  to  remove  from  him  the  defile- 
ment from  the  touch  of  a  dead  body,  they  im- 
parted to  him  another  sort  of  defilement,  as  they 
did  to  all  the  others  with  whom  they  came  in 
contact ;  and  this  defilement  was  i^emoved  by  the 
agency  of  water. 

This  is  the  only  interpretation  which  is  consis- 
tent in  all  respects  with  the  context,  and  with  all 
the  facts  and  testimonies  that  relate  to  the  sub- 
ject. 

1.  There  are  two  kinds  of  ceremonial  defile- 
ment mentioned  in  this  chapter,  arising  from  two 
different  and  opposite  sources.  One  kind  of  de- 
filement resulted  from  touching  a  dead  bod3^ 
"  He  that  toucheth  the  dead  body  of  any  man  shall 
be  unclean  seven  days"  (v.  ii).  The  other  kind 
of  defilement  was  incidental,  resulting  from  con- 
tact with  the  heifer-ashes,  the  water  of  separation. 
''  He  that  toucheth  the  water  of  separation  shall 
be  unclean  until  even  "  (v.  21). 

2.  These  different  kinds  of  defilement  were  i-e- 
moved  by  different  agencies:  the  one  by  heifer- 
ashes,  the  other  by  watei".  The  defilement  from 
a  dead  bodv  was  the  greater  ;  and  for  the  renujval 


special  Discussion  of  Sirach  xxxiv.  30.   yj 

of  this  greater  defilement  the  elaborate  prepara- 
tion of  the  heifer-ashes  was  required.  The  lighter 
and  incidental  defilement  caused  by  the  heifer- 
ashes  was  removed  by  the  use  of  water.  The  ex- 
amples described  by  Moses  in  this  chapter  make 
this  sufficiently  plain.  These  persons  had  not 
touched  a  dead  body,  but,  in  preparing  the  heifer- 
ashes  and  applying  them,  they  contracted  a  defile- 
ment, and  were  required  to  make  use  of  water  for 
purification. 

"  The  priest  shall  wash  his  clothes,  and  he  shall 
bathe  his  flesh  in  water,  and  .  .  .  shall  be  un- 
clean until  the  even  "  (v.  7). 

"  And  he  that  burneth  "  the  heifer  "  shall  wash 
his  clothes  in  water,  and  bathe  his  flesh  in  wa- 
ter, and  shall  be  unclean  until  the  even"  (v.  8). 
"  x\nd  he  that  gathereth  the  ashes  of  the  heifer 
shall  wasli  his  clothes,  and  be  unclean  until 
the  even  "  (v.  10). 

Also,  "  he  that  sprinkleth  the  water  of  separa- 
tion shall  wash  his  clothes"  (v.  21).  He  was 
clean  before  he  sprinkled  the  water  of  separation, 
but  he  incurred  defilement  in  the  act  of  sprinkling 
the  ashes. 

As  all  the  other  persons  incurred  defilement  by 
contact  with  the  heifer-ashes,  so  the  man  on  whom 
the  ashes  were  sprinkled  incurred  the  same  kind 


yS      The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

of  defilement ;  and  as  they  were  required  to  make 
use  of  water  for  its  removal,  he  also  was  required 
to  do  the  same.  "  On  the  seventh  day  he  shall 
purify  himself,  and  wash  his  clothes,  and  bathe 
himself  in  water,  and  shall  be  clean  at  even" 
(v.  19).  He  had  incurred  a  double  defilement, 
and  therefore  was  required  to  have  a  double 
purification. 

The  defilement  from  touching  a  dead  body  was 
a  much  deeper  defilement,  requiring  a  more  effec- 
tive agency  for  its  removal.  A  blood-red  heifer 
must  be  slain  and  burnt,  and  her  ashes  must  be 
mixed  with  water,  and  this  consecrated  mixture 
must  be  applied  on  the  third  day  and  on  the 
seventh  day. 

3.  The  purification  from  the  defilement  by  a 
dead  body  was  accomplished  solely  by  the  agency 
of  heifer-ashes. 

It  was  for  this  purpose  that  the  ashes  were  pre- 
pared and  kept.  The  ashes  of  tlie  heifer  "  shall 
be  kept  for  the  congregation  of  the  children  of 
Israel  for  a  water  of  separation :  it  is  a  purifica- 
tion for  sin"  (v.  9).  "  For  an  unclean  person  they 
shall  take  of  the  ashes  of  the  burnt  heifer  of  puri- 
fication for  sin  "  (v.  17). 

It  was  by  means  of  the  ashes  that  the  person 
defiled  was  purified  and   made  clean.     "  He  that 


special  Discussion  of  Sirach  xxxiv.  ^^o.   79 

touchetli  the  dead  body  of  any  man  shall  be  un- 
clean seven  days.  He  shall  purify  himself  with 
it  on  the  third  day,  and  on  the  seventh  day  he 
shall  be  clean  "  (vs.  11,  12). 

The  sprinkling  of  the  ashes  was  the  only  thing 
for  the  neglect  of  which  the  penalty  for  non- 
compliance with  the  requirement  was  inflicted. 
"  Whosoever  toucheth  the  dead  body  of  any  man 
that  is  dead,  and  purifieth  not  himself,  .  .  . 
that  soul  shall  be  cut  off  from  Israel:  because 
the  vrater  of  separation  was  not  sprinkled  upon 
him  "  (v,  13), 

This  is  made  doubly  prominent  by  the  emphatic 
repetition  of  the  penalty  for  neglect  of  the 
sprinkling.  "  That  soul  shall  be  cut  off  from 
among  the  congregation,  because  he  hath  defiled 
the  sanctuary  of  the  Lord  :  the  water  of  separa- 
tion hath  not  been  sprinkled  upon  him  :  he  is  un- 
clean "  (v.  20).  Thus  with  emphasis  it  is  made  to 
appear  that  the  sole  agency  of  the  heifer-ashes  is 
the  one  essential  thing  \n  this  purification. 

4.  The  two  classes  of  cases  are  entirely  distinct 
from  each  other.  The  points  of  difference  are 
lunnerous  and  broad. 

I.  The  sources  of  defilement  were  different: 
the  one  from  touching  a  dead  body,  the  other 
from  contact  with  the  heifer-ashes. 


So     The  Meaning  and  Pozver  of  Bapiisjn. 

2.  The  duration  of  the  two  kinds  of  defilement 
was  different:  the  one  lasting  seven  davs,  the 
other  only  one  daw 

3.  The  means  of  purification  were  different: 
the  one  heifei'-ashes,  the  other  water. 

4.  The  modes  of  applying  the  different  agencies 
were  different:  the  one  by  sprinkling,  the  other 
b}'  washing  the  clothes  and  bathing  in  water. 

5.  The  number  of  times  in  which  the  agencies 
must  be  applied  were  different :  in  the  one  case 
twice,  in  the  other  only  once. 

6.  The  persons  performing  the  operation  were 
different :  in  the  one  case  another  person  must 
appl}^  the  purifying  agency ;  in  the  other  the  per- 
son himself  must  do  it  by  his  own  act. 

7.  In  the  one  case  the  agency  was  heifer-ashes 
only  ;  m  the  other,  water  onl}*. 

Thus  clear,  broad,  and  distinct  are  the  two 
classes  of  cases.  The  failure  to  distinguish  be- 
tween them  has  been  a  fruitful  source  of  obscu- 
rity and  error. 

The  distinction  of  the  two  classes  which  Moses 
makes  in  the  context  of  Num.  xix.  19  determines 
the  true  interpretation  of  that  verse.  It  makes  it 
clear  that  the  interpretation  of  Dr.  Dale  is  the 
true  one.  The  sole  agency  for  the  removal 
of   the    defilement    from    a    dead    bodv    Nvas   the 


Special  Discussion  of  Sirach  xxxiv.  30.   8 1 

sprinkling  of  the  heifer-ashes.  The  use  of  watcr 
was  for  the  removal  of  another  and  different  ile- 
filement. 

This  interpretation  is  conhrmed  by  the  unani- 
mous testimon}^  of  Jewish,  inspired,  and  Patristic 
writers. 

I.  The  great  Jewish  historian  Josephus,  in  liis 
description  of  this  purification,  represents  it  as 
accomplished  solely  by  tlie  sprinkling  of  heifer- 
ashes.  In  his  "  Antiquities  of  the  Jews,"  IV.  iv. 
6,  he  has  informed  us  what  the  process  of  this 
purification  was.  He  says:  "Moses  purified  the 
people  after  this  manner"  ;  and,  having  given  the 
description,  he  adds:  "When  this  purification, 
...  as  it  has  now  been  described,  was  over."  1 
will  give  Dr.  Conant's  translation  of  the  text  of 
Immanucl  Bekker  (ed.  i853,  p.  33) : 

"  Those,  therefore,  who  were  defiled  by  the 
dead  bod}',  casting  a  little  of  the  ashes  into  a 
fountain  and  dipping  a  hyssop  branch,  they 
sprinkled  on  the  third  and  seventh  of  the 
days." 

Thus,  even  according  to  the  reading  of  Im- 
manucl Bekker,  and  the  translation  by  T.  J. 
Conant,  tJic  one  and  only  thing  which  Vv'as  done  for 
the  purification  of  those  defiled  by  the  dead  bodv 
was  sprinkling  upon  them  the  ashes  prepared  for 


82      The  UleaniJig  and  Pozver  of  Baptism. 

this   purpose;    and   this    is    what  Sirach    calls  a 
baptism. 

2.  Philo,  another  Jewish  writer,  nearly  contem- 
porary with  Josephus,  and,  like  him,  well  versed 
in  the  knowled^^e  of  Jewish  customs,  gives  his 
testimon}^  in  harmony  with  that  of  Josephus,  to 
the  nature  of  this  Jewish  rite.  He  says:  "  INIoses 
does  this  philosophically ;  for  most  others  are 
sprinkled  with  unmixed  water,  some  with  sea  or 
river  water,  others  with  water  drawn  from  the 
fountains.  But  Moses  emplojxd  ashes  for  this  pur- 
pose. Then,  as  to  the  manner,  they  put  them  into 
a  vessel,  pour  on  water,  then  moisten  branches  of 
hyssop  with  the  mixture,  then  sprinkle  it  upon 
those  who  are  to  be  purified  "  ("Jud.  Bap.,"  p.  loi). 

3.  A  greater  than  Josephus  and  Philo,  the 
Apostle  Paul,  has  described  this  rite  (Heb.  rx. 
13),  and  he  teaches  that  the  purification  was  ac- 
complished by  the  sprinkling  of  heifer-ashes. 
"The  ashes  of  a  heifer  sprinkling  the  unclean 
sanctifieth  to  the  purifying  of  the  flesh." 

4.  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  on  Isa.  iv.  4,  says: 
"  We  have  not  been  baptized  by  bare  water,  nor 
yet  by  the  ashes  of  a  heifer,  (since  we  have  been 
sprinkled  for  the  purification  of  the  flesh  only,  ac- 
cording to  the  saying  of  the  blessed  Paul),  but 
by  the  Hol}^  Spirit." 


special  Discussion  of  SiracJi  xxxiv.  30.   .S3 

5.  The  same  writer,  on  Isa.  i.  16,  speaking  of 
'the  water  of  purif3dng"  as  a  t3'pe  of  baptism, 
says:  "  What  the  water  of  purifying  is  the  most 
wise  Paul  shall  teach,  saying,  The  ashes  of  a 
heifer  sprinkling  the  unclean." 

6.  Gregory  Nazianzen :  "  Therefore  let  us  be 
baptized,  that  we  may  overcome:  let  us  partake 
of  the  purifying  waters  .  .  .  more  sanctifying 
than  the  ashes  of  a  heifer  sprinkling  the  unclean, 
and  having,  for  the  time,  power  for  tlie  purifica- 
t<on  of  the  body." 

There  is  complete  unanimity  in  the  testimonv, 
extending  over  the  interval  of  five  hundred  years 
from  Sirach  to  Cyril,  that  the  purification  from 
defilement  by  a  dead  body  was  accomplished  by 
the  sole  agency  of  the  sprinkling  of  heifcr-ashes. 
This  Sirach,  Cyril,  and  others  call  a  baptism. 

Another  point  in  this  special  discussion  which 
requires  attention  is  the  translation  of  the  last 
word  in  Sirach  xxxiv.  30  (loutron).  Dale  trans- 
lates: ''What  is  he  benefited  by  his  cleansing?'' 
Carson  :  "  What  availeth  his  dipping?  " 

The  translation  of  Dr.  Carson  is  shown  to  be 
erroneous  by  the  unanimous  testimony  of  Jose- 
phus  and  all  the  other  Greek  writers  who  refer 
to  this  subject.  They  all  with  one  voice  describe 
this  rite  as  a  purification  effected  by  the  sprinkling 


84      The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

of  heifer-ashes.  The  appeal  to  Num.  xi.  19,  iso- 
lated from  its  connection  with  the  context,  proves 
nothing,  on  account  of  the  ambiguity  of  the  pas- 
sage. Elsewhere  all  the  facts  and  all  the  testi- 
monies are  clear  and  decisive  that  the  baptism 
was  a  purification  effected  by  the  sprinkling  of 
the  heifer-ashes. 

The  translation  "  cleansing,"  which  Di\  Dale 
gives,  is  sustained  also  by  the  most  ample  proof 
from  the  usage  of  the  Greek  word. 

1.  Even  in  classical  Greek  it  sometimes  denotes 
"offerings  for  purification."  Hermann  Cremer, 
"Bib.  Theo.  Lex.,"  p.  418,  refers  to  passages  in 
proof  of  this  signification. 

2.  In  Hellenistic  Greek  this  is  its  usual  signi- 
fication, as  Dale  has  shown  in  "  Christie  and  Pa- 
tristic Baptism,"  A  few  examples  arc  here  se- 
lected. Basil,  speaking  of  the  baptism  of  the 
pr^tor  Arianthcus,  who  was  baptized  by  his 
wife  by  sprinkling  on  his  dying-bed,  says :  "  He 
washed  away  all  the  stains  of  his  soul  at  the  close 
of  his  life  by  the  wasJiing  [loutron]  of  regenera- 
tion "  (p.  501). 

This  example  is  decisive.  The  "  washing " 
was  not  a  dipping,  but  a  purification  by  sprink- 
ling, a  cleansing. 

Justin  Martyr:  "  Therefore  through  the  zvash- 


special  Discussion  of  Siracli  xxxiv.  30.  85 

iiig  [loutron]  of  repentance  ...  is  the  only  bap- 
tism which  is  able  to  cleanse  the  repenting  "  (p. 
501).  The  word  here  means  spiritual  washing,  a 
cleansing,  as  Justin  explains  it. 

The  same  writer  saj's  :  "  And  the  demons,  hav- 
ing heard  of  this  zuashing  [loutron],  .  .  .  requir- 
ed their  worshippers  to  sprinkle  themselves  "  (p. 
501). 

Origen  says  :  "  That  which  was  upon  the  wood 
of  the  altar  needed  cleansing  [loutron]  "  ("  Jud. 
Bap.,"  p.  328).  This  cleansing  was  effected  by 
pouring  on  water. 

Clemens  Alexandrinus :  "  It  is  called  washing 
[loutron]  because  we  are  cleansed  from  our  sins  " 
("C.  andP.  B.,"p.  553). 

The  same  writer  :  "  It  is  especially  necessary 
to  wash  the  soul  by  the  purifying  word.  .  .  . 
Therefore  the  best  zvasJiing  [loutron]  cleanses  the 
defilement  of  the  soul,  and  is  spiritual  "  (p.  506). 

3.  In  New  Testament  Greek  the  word  always 
means  purification,  cleansing.  Prof.  Stuart  trans- 
lates and  explains  Tit.  iii.  5  :  "  He  saved  iis  by  THE 
WASHING  [loutron]  of  regeneration — i.e.,  by  that 
purification  or  cleansing  which  regeneration  con- 
fers." In  Eph.  V.  26  he  also  translates  it  wasJi- 
?,7^,  and  explains  it  to  mean  "  cleansing  "("  Bib. 
Rep."  iii.  336). 


86      The  Mea7iing  and  Pozver  of  Baptism. 

4.  The  lexicons  give  the  word  the  same  signi- 
fication. Robinson,  in  his  "  Lexicon  of  the  New 
Testament,"  after  giving  its  classical  meanings — 
bath,  water  for  bathing,  zvasJiing — gives  as  its  mean- 
ino-  in  the  New  Testament  a  washins:,  ablution. 

Hermann  Cremer,  in  his  "  Biblico-Theological 
Lexicon  of  New  Testament  Greek,"  applies  the 
word  "  purification  "  as  the  signification  of  this 
word  in  Eph.  v.  26,  Tit.  iii.  5,  and  Sirach  xxxiv. 
30- 

BATHING. 

Dr.  Conant,  BAPTIZEIN,  1868,  p.  86,  trans- 
lates the  last  part  of  Sirach  xxxiv.  30:  "  What  is 
he  profited  by  his  bathing?"  meaning  by  bathing 
iuiiiicrsion.  The  word  bathing  is  used  in  Num.  xix. 
19,  "  Shall  bathe  himself  in  water,"  and  it  is  claimed 
that  bathing  is  done  by  immersion.  The  Greek 
word  louo  is  used  in  Num.  xix.  19  and  elsewhere 
in  the  Old  Testament  (Sept.),  and  from  this  verb 
the  noun  loutron^  which  is  used  in  Sirach  xxxiv.  30, 
is  derived.  The  subject  has  been  much  discussed. 
The  examples  quoted  above,  and  others  in  Dale, 
prove  that  in  its  religious  use,  both  ritual  and 
spiritual,  tlic  word  signifies  purification.  The 
whole  argument  for  immersion  rests  on  the  fact 
that  bathing  was  sometimes  performed  by  immer- 


special  Discussion  of  Si  rack  XXX  iv.  30.     87 

sion,  overlooking  \\\Q  fact  that  it  was  also  performed 
in  other  and  various  modes,  and  not  taking  cog- 
nizance of  its  religious  usage  in  the  sense  of  puri- 
fication. ]  will  append  some  testimonies  concern- 
ing other  modes  of  bathing. 

Bathing  was  frequently  performed  in  Oriental 
countries  by  pouring  z^nd  other  modes. 

In  Dr.  William  Smith's  "  Dictionary  of  Christian 
Antiquities,"  1875,  Vol,  I.  p.  168,  it  is  stated  that 
"  one  common  mode  of  bathing  among  the  ancients 
was  the  pouring  of  water  from  vessels  over  the 
body.  .  .  .  And  it  is  remarkable  that,  in  al- 
most all  the  earliest  representations  of  baptism 
that  have  been  preserved  to  us,  this  is  the  special 
act  represented." 

In  Smith's  "  Dictionary  of  Greek  and  Roman 
Antiquities,"  third  American  edition,  by  Charles 
Anthon,  LL.D.,  under  the  article  Loutron,  p.  598, 
Dr.  Smitli  says:  "On  ancient  vases,  on  wliich 
persons  are  represented  bathing,  we  never  find 
anything  corresponding  to  a  modern  bath,  in 
which  persons  can  stand  or  sit  ;  but  there  is  al- 
ways a  round  or  oval  basin  {\ovTt)p  or  Xovtypiov) 
resting  on  a  stand,  by  the  side  of  which  those  who 
arc  bathing  are  represented  standing  undressed 
and  washing  themselves,  as  is  seen  in  the  follow- 
ing woodcut,  taken  from  Sir  \V.  Hamilton's  vases. 


88      The  Aleaning  aiid  Power  of  Baptism. 

The  word  dcvtosia  upon  it  shows  that  it  belong'cd 
to  a  public  bath." 

Dr.  Smith,  "  Die.  of  Gr.  and  Rom.  Ant.,"  p.  143, 
speaks  of  the  vessel  for  bathing  which,  in  the 
age  of  Homer,  was  called  asaniintJios,  and  says  : 
"  It  would  appear,  from  the  description  of  the 
bath  administered  to  Ulysses  in  the  palace  of 
Circe,  that  this  vessel  did  not  contain  ivatcr  itself, 
but  was  only  used  for  the  bather  to  sit  in  while 
the  warm  water  zvas  poured  ovci-  Jiini,  vv'hich  was 
heated  in  a  large  caldron  or  tripod,  under  which 
the  lire  was  placed,  and,  when  sufficiently 
warmed,  was  taken  out  in  other  vessels  and 
poured  over  the  head  and  shoulders  of  the  person 
who  sat  in  the  asaminthos.  .  .  .  The  vessel 
was  of  polished  marble,  like  the  basins  (labra) 
which  have  been  discovered  in  the  Roman 
briths."  There  v/ere  "  similar  basins,"  says  Prof. 
Wilson,  "at  the  porticos  of  Christian  churches, 
in  the  earlier  centuries,  for  washing  the  hands." 

Among  the  paintings  in  an  ancient  tomb  at 
Thebes,  described  by  Sir  Gardner  Wilkinson 
in  his  work  on  "The  Manners  and  Customs 
of  the  Ancient  Egyptians,"  is  one  v,-hich 
contains  a  representation  of  a  lady  enjoying 
the  luxury  of  a  bath  :  "  One  attendant  ic- 
movcs    the    jewelry   and   clothes  she   has    taken 


Special  Discussion  of  Sirach  xxxiv.  30.     89 

off,  or  suspLMids  tlicm  to  a  stand  ia  tlie  apart- 
ment ;  another  pours  water  from  a  I'asc  over  Iter 
head,  as  the  third  rubs  her  arms  and  body  with 
Iicr  open  hands;  and  a  fourth,  seated  near  her, 
holds  a  sweet-scented  llowcr  to  her  nose,  and 
supports  her  as  she  sits  (on  a  carpet  or  mal)." 
Wilkinson  further  says  :  "  The  same  subject  is 
treated  nearly  in  the  same  manner  on  some  of 
the  Greek  vases,  the  water  being  poured  over  the 
^bather,  who  kneels  or  is  seated  on  the  g-round. 
The  mode  of  bathing  in  Egypt  is  thus  identified 
with  that  of  Greece  "  ("  Jud.  Bap.,"  p.  121). 

I^ev.  Mr.  Lowenthal,  missionary  in  India,  says: 
"The  Hindoos  use  a  small  urn,  called  iota,  with 
which  the}'  bathe  at  the  yI^qy,  pouring  water  over 
the  body  "  (p.  122). 

In  Ovid's  description  of  Diana's  bath,  he  says  : 
"  They  pour  water  out  of  the  urns  "  (urnis  undara 
efifundunt). 

Porphyry  says:  "  It  was  customary  for  married 
women  to  purify  maidens  by  sprinkling  or  affu- 
sion, before  marriages,  with  water  taken  from 
fountains  and  living  springs."  Photius  tells  us 
"  that  the  water  used  for  this  purpose  was 
brought  in  a  pitcher"  ("  C.  and  P.  B.,"  p.  501). 
The  water  was  sometimes  brought  by  a  bo}',  and 
sometimes   by  a  girl,  as   the    representations  on 


90      The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

ancient  monuments    indicate    (•'Die.  of    Gr.   and 
Rom.  Ant.,"  p.  599). 

Dr.  Dale  sa3-s :  "  The  common  way  of  bathing 
among  the  Greeks  was  not  by  immersion,  but  by 
pouring  water  over  the  body"  ("  C.  and  P.  B.,"  p. 
504).  Prof.  Stuart  says  of  the  word  as  used  in  the 
Old  Testament:  "Neither  ivasJiing  nor  bathing 
appears  to  be  the  same  as  plunging  or  immersing; 
for  neither  the  word  fabal,  to  iiiiiiicrsc^  nor  the 
word  shataph,  to  iinindati\  is  used  in  reference  to 
these  ceremonial  washings"  (p.  340).  "We  fmd 
no  example  among  all  the  Levitical  washings  or 
ablutions  where  immersion  of  the  person  is  re- 
quired. The  word  raliafs,  which  is  ahnost  uni- 
formly employed,  and  which  our  translators  have 
rendered  ivasJi  and  bathe,  does  not  imply  iinvier- 
.fW7^ "  (p.  341).  Even  Dr.  Carson,  near  the  close 
of  his  discussion,  says  of  louo:  "That  the  word 
does  not  necessarily  express  mode,  I  readily 
admit"  (p.  4S6).  All  the  historic  facts  that  relate 
to  the  usage  of  the  word  in  its  different  forms 
furnish  demonstration  that  it  does  not  denote  a 
delinite  and  specific  act,  to  dip,  but  is  used  in  the 
general  sense  of  washing,  or  cleansing  by  an}^ 
ot  tlie  different  modes  of  applying  the  cleansing 
agency.  The  effort  to  force  the  word  in  Sirach 
xxxiv.  30  to  signify  a  dipping  is  without  warrant  in 


Special  Discussion  of  Sirach  xxxiv.  30,     91 

the  usage  of  the  word,  and  is  in  complete  opposi- 
tion to  the  universal  testimony  of  ancient  writers, 
jMoscs,  Joscphus,  Fhilo,  Paul,  Cyril,  and  the  rest, 
that  the  loutron  which  Sirach  calls  a  baptism  is  a 
cleansing-  by  sprinkling  the  heifer-ashes  on  the 
person  needing  purification. 


CHAPTER  1\^. 

GENUINENESS    OF    THE    QUOTATION     FROM    JOSE- 

PIIUS. 

'T~^HERE  is  one  phrase  in  the  quotation  from 
Josephus  which  is  omitted  in  the  text  of 
Immanuel  Bekker.  Dr.  Dale  refers  to  this 
omission  in  his  "Judaic  Baptism,"  but  gives 
good  I'casons  ibr  retaining  the  common  read- 
ing as  given  in  the  other  critical  editions  and 
in  the  manuscripts  of  the  woiks  of  Josephus.  As 
the  value  of  the  quotation  in  relation  to  baptism 
depends  on  the  genuineness  of  the  words  omitted 
b}-  Bekker,  I  will  give  the  reasons  in  proof  of 
their  genuineness.  I  am  indebted  to  Dr.  Dale 
for  the  means  of  proof,  not  only  as  given  in  his 
book,  but  for  the  Greek  and  Latin  quotations 
from  critical  editions  of  Josephus.  That  the 
words  omitted  by  Bekker  are  genuine  is  proved 
b}^  the  fact  that  no  good  reason  has  ever  been 
given  for  their  omission,  and  that  they  are  found 
in  the  manuscripts  and  in  all  the  critical  editions 
of  the  works  of  Josephus,  except  tiiat  of  Bekker. 

I.  The  reading  of  the  passage   given    by   Dr. 
9a 


Genuineness  of  Quotation  from  josephus.  93 

Dale  is  the  common  reading.  This  is  acknow- 
ledged by  Dr.  Conant,  who  calls  it  "the  common 
Greek  text,"  "the  common  reading,"  and  he 
gives  it  (BAPTIZEIN,  1868,  p.  33)  in  a  note  prc- 
cisel}'  as  it  is  given  by  Dr.  Dale. 

2.  William  Whiston,  in  his  translation  of  Jose- 
phus,  1737,  gives  the  whole  passage,  without  the 
slisfhtest  intimation  of  a  different  reading:.  Else- 
where  he  notices  the  various  readings  in  the 
copious  notes  to  his  translation,  but  makes  no  al- 
lusion to  any  variation  in  this  passage.  He  had 
ample  means  of  knowing,  for  in  a  note,  "Ant.," 
xviii.  iv.  6,  he  says  of  a  certain  date  that  it  is 
made  out  by  "  a  calculation  from  all  Joscphiis' 
Greek  copies!'  He  had  before  him,  also,  Hud- 
son's critical  edition,  to  which,  he  frequently 
refers  as  of  the  highest  authority,  and  he  doubt- 
less was  satisfied  with  the  judgment  of  Hudson, 
who  rejects  Bekker's  alteration  and  retains  the 
common  reading. 

3.  Hudson,  Principal  of  St.  INIary's  Hall,  Ox- 
ford, in  his  critical  edition  of  the  works  of  Jose- 
phus,  bearing  date  1720,  gives  the  reading  of  this 
passage  just  as  it  is  given  by  Dr.  Dale.  This 
edition  was  the  work  of  an  eminent  scholar,  criti- 
cally prosecuted,  with  voluminous  and  learned 
notes.     On  the  title-page  of  his  edition  we  read  : 


94      The  JMcaniji^  and  Power  of  Baptisjn. 

"FLAVII   JOSEPIII 
OPERA   OMNIA. 
OXONIl, 
MDCCXX. 

Ad  codices  fere  omnes  cum  impresses  turn 
manuscriptos  diligenter  recensuit,  nova  versione 
donavit,  et  notis  illustravit  Joannes  Hudsonnis, 
S.T.P.,  Aulas  Beatae  Marias  Virginis  Principalis, 
et  Protobibliothecarius  Bodleianus," 

The  text  of  Hudson's  edition,  it  thus  appears, 
is  the  result  of  a  careful  collation  of  "almost  all 
the  printed  editions  and  manuscript  copies "  of 
the  works  of  Josephus  to  be  found.  Thus  his 
edition  conforms  to  the  printed  editions  and  man- 
uscript copies  previously  existing. 

Immanuel  Bekkcr,  taking  up  a  suggestion 
which  had  been  thrown  out  by  Bonfr^re,  erased 
the  phrase  in  question  in  his  edition.  The  read- 
ing of  Bekkcr,  translated  by  Conant,  was  given 
chap.  iii.  p.  8i.  Hudson  had  Bonfrere's  sugges- 
tion before  him,  thoughtfully  considered  it,  found 
it  wanting  in  validity,  and  rejected  if. 

4.  Nearly  two  centuries  earlier,  in  1544,  the 
critical  edition  of  Jerome  Frobcnus  and  Nicholas 
Episcopius  was  printed  at  Basle,  in  Switzerland. 
This  edition  was  printed  within  the  first  century 
after    the    discovery    of    printing.     There    must 


Gemiinencss  of  QiLolaiioit  from  Josephiis.   95 

have  bct-n  copies  of  the  manuscript  of  Josephus, 
if  not  printed  editions,  which  contained  the  pas- 
sage as  it  stands  in  this  edition,  and  whicii  came 
down  from  earlier  periods  and  centuries.  On  the 
title-page  we  read : 

"  FLAVII  JOSEPHI  OPERA, 
HIERONYMUS  FROBENUS  ET  NICOLAUS  EPISCOPIUS. 
BASILEiE,    MDXLIIII." 

The  Greek  text  of  the  passage  of  Josephus 
under  consideration  is  given  in  this  edition  as 
follows.     A  single  sentence  from  the  preceding 

period  is  for  a  special  reason  prefixed  : 

'^vkov  jitdpivov  eii  jxeaov  €ju/3(xXXova'i  to  nvp, 
Hai  vffffcjTrov,  noii  cpoivinrov  i'piov.  .  .  .  Tov?  ovv 
art 6  vejipov  j-is/xiaff/ievov?,  r?/?  ricppa?  oXiyov  ei^ 
7[7]y7)v  evievrei  uai  vGGcoTtov,  (SaTttiGavrei  rs  7iai 
rff?  t£cppa?  Tavr?}?  £iS  Ttrjyip^,  ippaivov  tpirjj  iial 
i(3dofXJ]  rc5r  ypiepc^v  •  uai  nadapoi'  to  Xoircov  i/ffav. 
Tovro  de  ?iai  nareXdovcji  ei^rd^  uXijpovxioci  Ttpofflt- 
a^e  Ttouiv. 

The  entire  text  as  given  above  is  the  same, 
without  the  change  of  a  single  word,  in  both 
Hudson's  edition  of  1720  and  the  Basle  edition  of 
1544.  The  sole  difference  is  that  the  comma  after 
^^  7T7]yi'}v^^  is  the  punctuation  of  Hudson;  there  is 
no  mark  of  punctuation  after  this  word  in  the 
"  Basilese "  edition.  The  Greek  colon  after 
'■'■i]}.ifpc^v''^  is  also  that  of  Hudson;  the  punctuat- 
ing mark  in  the  "  Basilecc  "  is  a  comma.      The 


g6      T/ij  M:anlng  and  Pow:r  of  Baptism. 

difference  is  very  minute,  and  has  no  effect  upon 
I  lie  meaning". 

5.  And  now  what  reason  is  ofiven  for  omittino- 
a  part  of  this  text?  It  is  found  in  all  the  manu- 
scripts and  in  all  the  printed  editions  of  Jose- 
phus,  except  that  of  Bekker.  The  erasure  of 
v/ords  from  an  ancient  writer  cannot  be  justi- 
fied by  any  light  reason.  Jacques  Bonfrere,  a 
Jesuit,  in  his  Latin  "Commentary  on  the  Pen- 
tateuch," A.D.  1625,  failing  to  interpret  Num. 
xix.  19  so  as  to  elicit  a  meaning  tliat  seemed  to 
harmonize  with  the  common  reading  of  the  pas- 
sage in  Josephus,  suggested  the  omission  of  the 
phrase  ra  ua\  r?/?  rt(ppa<;  ravTij^  ei;  mjyj'jv.  Two 
hundred  years  later  Immanucl  Bekker,  in  his 
edition  of  Josephus,  too  hastily  adopted  the  sug- 
gestion of  Bonfrere.  Instead  of  such  mutilation 
of  an  ancient  author,  the  more  scholarly  method 
would  have  been  to  seek  a  better  understanding- 
of  the  real  meaning  of  both  Moses  and  Josephus. 
But,  Ave  ask,  what  is  the  reason  given  for  this 
erasure?  "Some  words,"  it  is  said,  "are  re- 
peated." The  common  text  reads:  "  Putting  a 
little  of  the  ashes  and  a  hyssop-branch  into  a 
spring,  and  baptizing  of  this  ashes  [put]  into  the 
spring." 

The  reason  given  is  not  a  good  one.     There  is 


Gejvuineness  of  Quotation  from  Joscphus.  97 

no  repetition  in  the  thought.  The  clause  in 
which  the  words  "ashes"  and  "into  the  spring" 
are  repeated,  expresses  an  additional  thought,  and 
this  additional  thought  is  rj-j-r/^/M/ to  the  descrip- 
tion of  the  process  of  purification.  Josephus  first 
tells  us  how  the  ashes  were  prepared  for  use,  and 
then  he  tells  us  how.  they  were  used.  First  they 
prepare  the  ashes  for  use  by  mixing  them  with 
spring-water.  When  thus  prepared,  the}'  make 
use  of  them  for  purifjnng  the  persons  defiled. 
There  was  a  good  and  sufficient  reason  for  the 
repetition  of  the  words,  and  Josephus  employs 
the  expression  of  design.  Only  four  Greek  words 
are  repeated,  and  between  them  is  a  new  word 
which  shows  that  Josephus  liad  a  reason  for  using 
this  expression.  Common  ashos  would  not  be 
suitable  for  the  work  of  purification.  Therefore 
Josephus  says  :  "  They  sprinkle  the  defiled  with 
this  ashes  " — i.e.,  the  ashes  which  had  been  mixed 
with  the  spring-water.  Thus,  when  we  look  be- 
yond the  mere  words  to  the  thought,  and  per- 
ceive the  facts  of  the  narration,  the  objection 
wholly  disappears.  Such  a  shallow  reason  as  this 
for  the  erasure  of  words  from  the  works  of  an 
ancient  author  cannot  find  acceptance  with  con« 
sideratc  scholars.  It  would  make  havoc  with 
ancient  and  modern  writings.     In  the  very  next 


98      The  JMeaning  and  Pozvcr  of  Baptism. 

chapter  of  Joscphus,  tlic  expression,  "tlie  He- 
brews," occurs  four  times  in  one  sentence.  If 
words  are  to  be  struck  out  for  such  a  reason, 
authors  would  be  mutilated  without  mercy  at  the 
arbitrary  will  of  any  one  who  cither  does  not  un- 
derstand a  passage,  or  who  v/islies  to  get  rid  of 
words  which  he  does  not  like  to  accept. 

6.  There  are  other  internal  reasons  in  the 
Greek  ot  Josephus  which  scholars  give  for  re- 
jecting the  change  in  the  common  reading  which 
Bontrcre  proposes,  and  for  rejecting  the  punctua- 
tion introduced  to  sustain  it.  One  reason  is 
found  in  the  change  which  it  makes  in  the  style 
of  Josephus  as  shown  in  the  immediately  preced- 
ing passage:  "They  cast  cedar  wood  into  the 
midst  of  the  fire,  and  hyssop  and  scarlet  wool." 
Here,  in  the  Greek  sentence  (the  Greek  idiom 
being  unlike  tlie  English,  as  Greek  scholars  will 
perceive),  one  accusative  precedes  and  another 
follows  the  Greek  verb.  The  same  Greek  idiom 
appears,  as  we  should  naturally  expect,  in  the 
succeeding  passage  (although  it  cannot  be  shov/n 
in  the  translation) :  "  Introducing  a  little  of  the 
ashes  into  the  spring  [water],  and  hyssop."  But 
Bonfr^re  breaks  up  this  harmony  by  liis  erasure 
and  by  connecting  "  hyssop  "  with  "  ftcxTtriGavTeg." 
Other   reasons   in    the    Greek  style  of  Josephus 


Genuineness  of  Quotation  from  fosephns.  99 

are  given,  but  it  is  not  needful   liere  to  discuss 
them. 

7.  Hudson  found  in  one  edition  or  manuscript 
whicli  he  examined  a  preposition  supplied  b}'  the 
editor  or  cop3'ist,  which  shows  that  that  editor 
did  not  accept  the  judgment  of  Bonfrcrc.  Hud- 
son says:  "Est  qui  legit  ftcxTXTiaixvTE?  fiard  6h 
rvb  ricppa?,''  etc.  This  editor  or  copyist,  by  in- 
serting this  Greek  preposition,  indicates  that  he 
regarded  the  ashes  to  be  under  the  control  of 
§a7txiaavrEi,  "  baptizing  ivitJi  this  ashes."  But 
there  is  no  need  of  a  preposition  to  convey  the 
meaning  of  Josephus.  In  conformity  with  a 
common  ride  of  Greek  grammar,  he  employs  the 
genitive  case  without  the  preposition  to  denote 
the  material  by  means  of  which  the  purification 
was  effected.  "  The  origin,  source,  and  material 
are  put  in  the  genitive  "  (Crosby,  Greek  Grammar, 
sec.  412).  The  ashes  are  the  material  for  accom- 
plishing the  purification.  The  translation  of 
Dale  gives  the  true  meaning:  "  Baptizing  by  this 
ashes,  .  .  .  they  sprinkle  on  the  third  and 
seventh  day"  (p.  387). 

WILLIAM  WIIISTON'S   TRANSLATION   OF   JOSEPHUS. 

"  When,  therefore,  any  persons  were  defiled  by 
a  dead  bodA',  they  put  a  little  of  these  ashes  into 


lOO   The  Aleanhig  a7id  Power  of  Baptism. 

spring- water  with  hyssop,  and,  dipping  part  of 
these  ashes  in  it,  they  sprinkled  them  with  it, 
both  on  the  third  day  and  on  the  seventh,  and 
after  that  they  were  clean.  This  he  enjoined 
tliem  to  do  also  when  the  tribes  should  come  into 
their  own  land."  This  version  is  not  quoted  by 
genuine  scholars  in  tlic  baptismal  controversy  ; 
but  as  it  has  been  quoted  against  Dale,  and  is 
liable  to  be  quoted  so  again  by  those  who  have 
onl)'  a  supcrhcial  knowledge  of  the  subject,  the 
following  reasons  for  rejecting  it  are  here  repub- 
lished from  "  The  Reviewer  Reviewed." 

1.  The  ashes,  even  in  Whiston's  translation, 
were  already  put  into  the  spring,  mixing  with 
water,  and  therefore  ready  for  use,  before  he  came 
to  what  he  calls  "  dipping  part  of  these  ashes  in 
it."  Why,  then,  does  he  speak  of  dipping  part 
of  these  ashes  in  it  when  they  were  already 
in  ? 

2.  The  w^ord  "part"  in  the  phrase  "dipping 
part  of  these  ashes  "  is  not  in  the  original.  It  is 
an  interpolation  made  by  the  translator  without 
the  knowledge  or  consent  of  Josephus. 

3.  The  idea  of  "dipping  ashes"  is  absurd. 
Moses  speaks  of  dipping  the  hyssop-branch  into 
tlie  water  of  separation  preparatory  to  sprinkling 
the  defiled;    but  the  idea  of  "  dipping  ashes  "  is 


Gemtineness  of  Quotation  from  yoscphus.   loi 

one  for  which  neither  IMoses  nor  Josephus  is  re- 
sponsible. 

4.  Hard  pressed  by  this  absurdity,  Dr.  Carson 
(p.  289)  says:  "The  ashes  must  have  been  put 
into  the  water  in  a  bag,  as  in  cookery."  And 
how  much  better  does  this  make  it  ?  The  whole 
idea  of  dipping  ashes,  and  doing  it  by  putting 
them  into  a  bag,  is  a  fiction  invented  to  prop  a 
modern  theory  which  conflicts  with  the  descrip- 
tion given  of  this  rite  in  the  original  language  of 
Josephus. 

A  translation  encumbered  by  such  difficulties  I 
reject,  and  adopt  the  translation  of  Dale,  which 
is  true  to  every  word  of  the  Greek,  and  gives  a 
meaning  free  from  absurdity.     .     .     . 

As  Whiston  was  mistaken,  in  his  philosophy 
when  he  maintained  that  the  deluge  of  Noah  was 
caused  by  the  tail  of  a  comet,  and  as  he  was  mis- 
taken in  his  interpretation  of  prophecy  when  he 
predicted  that  the  millennium  would  commence 
in  1766  ("New  Am.  Cyc,"  XVT.  394),  so,  in  his 
translation  of  this  passage,  he  has  been  untrue 
to  the  Greek  of  Josephus,  and  misled  the  mere 
English  reader  by  a  translation  which  is  absurd. 

The  quotation  from  Josephus  is  genuine,  and  is 
rightly  translated  b}^  Dr.  Dale.  It  gives  a  two- 
fold testimony  to  the  current  use  of  the  Greek 


102    The  I\[cajiing  and  Pozver  of  Baptisj7i. 

woi'd  baptizo  among-  the  Jewish  people  t(D  denote 
ceremonial  purification  b}^  the  sprinkling  of 
heifer-ashes.  The  complete  description  which  it 
gives,  even  in  the  reading  of  Immanuel  Bekker, 
of  the  purification  which  Sirach  calls  a  baptism, 
furnishes  absolute  demonstration  that  this  bap- 
tism is  effected  by  the  sole  agency  of  the  heifer- 
ashes.  It  also  gives  the  direct  testimony  of  Jo- 
sephus  to  the  same  truth;  for  the  whole  passage 
is  genuine,  according  to  the  universal  testimony 
of  the  manuscripts  of  Josephus,  and  all  the  criti- 
cal editions  of  Josephus,  except  that  of  Bekker ; 
and  the  reason  which  Bekker  gives  for  the  era- 
sure is  so  unsubstantial  that  it  is  rejected  b}''  the 
most  competent  and  impartial  scholars,  like 
Hudson,  as  wholly  invalid,  and  the  original  and 
common  readinof  is  retained. 


CHAPTER  V. 

BAPTISMS   IN   THE   SEPTUAGINT. 

In  the  third  century  before  Christ  the  Hebrew 
Scriptures  were  translated  into  the  Greek  lan- 
guage, and  in  this  Greek  Version  the  Apocryphal 
books  of  the  Old  Testament  were  incorporated. 
It  is  called  the  Septuagint  because  its  translation 
was  attributed  to  severity  Jewish  elders.  It  is 
written  in  IiellcniL,tic  Greek,  or,  as  it  is  some- 
times called,  Jewish  Greek,  and  is  the  oldest 
monument  of  that  kind  of  Greek  extant.  "  The 
basis  of  the  Hellenistic  language  of  the  New 
Testament,"  says  Alexander  Buttmann,  "  is  the 
so-called  Macedo-Alexandrian  dialect,  which  be- 
came current  in  the  time  of  the  Ptolemies,  es- 
pecially at  Alexandria,  then  the  scat  of  culture." 
This  became  the  vernacular  language  of  the  Greek- 
speaking  Jews  after  they  lost  the  popular  use  of 
the  Hebrew  in  tl:e  time  of  the  Babylonish  cap- 
tivity, and  after  the  conquest  of  Alexander  the 
Great  had  brought  them  under  Grecian  swa}'. 
The  pecuhajitics  of  Hellenistic  Greek  as  SToken 


1 04    The  Meajting  and  Power  of  Baptism, 

by  the  Jews  arose  from  the  expression  of  Hebrew 
ideas  and  Hebrew  modes  of  thought  in  the  Greek 
language.  This  gave  a  Hebrew  coloring  and  a  He- 
brew signification  to  a  multitude  of  Greek  words. 
This  Hellenic  dialect  was  known  and  spoken 
throughout  the  Roman  Empire  by  the  Hellen- 
istic Jews  who  adopted  the  Greek  civilization. 

As  the  New  Testament  was  v/ritten  in  Hellen- 
istic and  not  in   classic   Greek,  and   as  a   large 
number   of  classic    Greek    words  underwent   an 
essential  modification  in  their  use  by  the   Jews 
and  the  Christian  fathers,  who  received  the  Scrip- 
tures from  the  Jews,  the  special  usage  of  words 
like  baptizo  in  Hellenistic  Greek  requires  especial 
attention.      It  has  been  a  great  error  to  look  ex- 
clusively to  the  ciassic  usage  of  this  word,  and 
almost   wholly   overlook    its    Hellenistic   usage. 
By  fastening  the  attention  on  one  single  meanitig 
of  the   word   in  its  primary  classic  use,  and   by 
faihng  to  give  due  consideration  to  those  numer- 
ous passages  which,  with  equal  clearness,  teach  a 
secondary  use,  the  truth  is  kept  out  of  sight. 

The  historic  origin  of  the  signification  to  purify  ' 
in  the  Greek  word  baptizo  is  found  in  the  employ- 
ment   of  this  word  by  the  Jews  to  express   the 
purificatory  rites  enjoined  in  the  Hebrew  Scrip- 
tures.    The  usage  of  this   word   by   the   Patrists 


Baptisms  in  the  Scptuagint.  105 

has  been  illustrated  in  the  second  chapter.  It  is 
used  a  few  times  in  the  Scptuagint,  and,  as  the 
Scptuagint  was  in  the  hands  of  the  Greek-speak- 
ing Jews,  and  is  frequent!}'-  quoted  in  the  New 
Testament,  the  usage  of  the  word  in  that  Version 
calls  for  attention. 

The  Greek  words  bapto  and  baptizo  in  the 
Scptuagint  have  the  same  general  characteristics 
as  in  the  classics,  while  baptizo  has  its  special 
secondar}^  meaning,  purification.  The  differences 
and  resemblances  of  these  words  are  the  same  as 
in  classic  usage.  Bapto  has  its  primary  and  some 
of  its  secondary  significations,  but  in  both  its  pri- 
mary and  in  its  secondar}'  meanings  it  is  clearly 
distinguished  from  baptizo.  From  the  failure  to 
observe  this  distinction,  it  has-  often  been  treated 
as  if  it  were  employed  to  denote  the  rite  of  bap- 
tism. But  it  is  never  thus  used  in  the  Scptuagint 
or  in  the  New  Testament.  It  is  never  used  as  a 
synon3^m  of  baptizo,  nor  is  it  ever  applied  to  the 
ordinance  of  baptism.  It  occurs  in  the  following 
passages:  Ex.  xii'.  22;  Lev.  iv.  6,  17,  ix.  9,  xi.  32, 
xiv.  6,  16,  51;  Num.  xix.  18;  Deut.  xxxiii.  24; 
Josh.  iii.  15;  Ruth  ii.  14;  i  Sam.  xiv.  27;  2  Kings 
viii.  15  ;  Job  ix.  31  ;  Ps.  Ixviii.  23  ;  Ezek.  xxiii.  15  ; 
Dan.  iv.  33,  V.  21  ;  also,  Nev/  Testament,  Luke  xvi. 
24;  John  xiii.  26;  Rev.  xix.  13, 


1 06    The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

In  its  primary  meaning  it  expresses  a  specific 
and  definite  act,  to  dip.  "  The  priest  shall  dip  his 
finger  in  the  blood,  and  sprinkle"  (Lev.  iv.  0). 

"  A  clean  person  shall  take  hyssop,  and  dip  it  in 
the  water,  and  sprinkle"  (Num.  xix.  iS). 

It  is  also  used  in  a  secondary  sense,  as  it  is  in 
the  classics,  to  express  condition.  In  Ezek.  xxiii. 
15  it  signifies  "dyed  attire,"  or,  as  Prof.  Stuart 
translates  it,  "  colored  turbans  "  (p.  307).  This  is 
the  same  as  its  classic  signification,  to  dye. 

Dan.  iv.  33,  v.  21  :  "  His  bod}'  was  ivct  with 
the  dew  of  heaven  "  ;  or,  as  Stuart  translates  it, 
moistened — a  meaning  which  it  has  in  the  classics. 
Dr.  Carson  (p.  35)  contends  for  the  literal  mean- 
ing. Prof.  Stuart  translates  it "  smear  or  moisten  " 
in  Ex.  xii.  22  and  Lev.  iv.  17,  xiv.  16,  where  the 
Seventy,  by  using  the  Greek  preposition  ano  with 
the  genitive  case,  evidently  "  meant  to  give  an- 
other shade  of  meaning  to  the  expression"  from 
what  the}'  would  have  done  if  they. had  translated 
by  the  preposition  iU — into — with  the  accusative 
case,  as  in  Lev.  iv.  6,  ix.  9,  xi.  32,  xiv.  6,  and 
other  places. 

As  the  word  bapto  in  its  primary  signification 
is  the  Greek  word  employed  in  actual  usage,  both 
in  the  classics  and  in  the  Scriptures,  to  express  the 
act  denoted  h\;  dip ;  and  as  this  Greek  word  is 


Baptisms  in  the  SeptiLagint.  107 

never  applied  to  the  ordinance  of  baptism  ;  and  as 
the  two  Greek  words  bapto  and  baptizo  are  never 
interchanged  with  each  other;  and  as  there  is  no 
need  of  two  words  to  express  exactly  the  same 
thing,  it  is  wholly  without  reason,  as  well  as  de- 
void of  examples  of  usage,  to  make  baptizo  have 
the  same  identical  signification  with  bapto.  The 
distinction  which  Greek  usage  makes  between 
these  two  words  in  their  respective  significations 
should  be  kept  clear. 

SIRACH  XXXIV.  30. 

Baptizo  is  not  often  found  in  the  Septuagint  ; 
but  its  use  in  Sirach  xxxiv.  30  is  of  eminent  va!uc, 
as  it  relates,  not  to  a  single  occurrence,  but  to  a 
national  custom  of  daily  occurrence  during  the  v.diole 
fifteen  hundred  years  of  the  life  of  the  Jewish  peo- 
ple. By  the  Law  of  INIoses  an}-  person  contracted 
ceremonial  defilement  by  touciiing  a  dead  body, 
and  he  received  ceremonial  purification  by  having 
the  water  of  separation  sprinkled  upon  him  on 
the  third  day  and  on  the  seventh  day.  This  pu- 
rification Sirach  calls  a  baptism,  and  millions  of 
these  baptisms  were  performed  as  generation  after 
generation  died  and  passed  away. 

The  translation  of  this  important  passage   by 


io8    The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptls77i. 

Dr.  Dale  has  already  been  given.  Prof.  Stuart 
gives  it  the  same  meaning.  He  translates  the 
word  "  cleansed  "  .•  "  He  who  is  CLEANSED  from  a 
dead  [body]  and  toucheth  it  again,  what  does  he 
profit  by  his  washing?"  ("Bib.  Rep.,"  Vol.  HI. 
p.  308). 

As  this  important  passage  has  given  rise  to 
much  discussion  in  respect  to  some  related  words, 
and  as  these  related  words  have  a  varied  bearing 
on  the  subject,  I  will  give  a  list  of  them.  The 
Greek  word  ioiitron,  at  the  close  of  the  quotation, 
comes  from  the  Greek  word  I0210,  wdiich  the  Sev- 
enty often  use  to  translate  the  Hebrew  word 
rahats.  These  words  do  not  denote  a  specific  act, 
as  to  dip,  but  they  express  the  generic  idea  to  zoash, 
to  bathe,  to  cleanse.  The  use  of  the  word  "  wash  " 
and  "  bathe  "  in  the  English  Version  also  requires 
attention. 

I.  The  Hebrew  word  rahats  occurs  in  the  fol- 
lowing places  :  Gen.  xviii.  4,  xix,  2,  xxiv.  32, 
xliii.  24,  31  ;  Ex.  ii.  5,  xxix.  4,  17,  xxx.  iS,  19,  20, 
21,  xl.  12,  30,  31,  32;  Lev.  i.  9,  viii.  6,  xiv.  8,9, 
XV.  5,  6,  7,  8,  10,  II,  13,  16,  18,  21,  22,  27,  xvi.  4,' 
24,  26,  28,  xvii.  15,  16,  xxii.  6;  Num.  xix.  7,  8,  19; 
Dcut.  xxi.  6,  xxiii.  1 1  ;  Judges  xix.  21  ;  Ruth  iii.  3  ; 
I  Sam.  XXV.  41  ;  2  Sam.  xi.  2,  8,  xii.  20;  i  Kings 
xxii.  38;  2  Kings  v.  10,  12,  13  ;  2  Chron.  iv.  6  bis ^ 


Baplisjus  in  the  Scptitagint.  109 

Ps.  xxvi.  6,  Iviii.  10,  Ixxiii.  13;  Prov.  xxx.  12; 
Cant.  V.  3,  12  ;  Isa.  i.  16,  iv.  4  ;  Ezck.  xvi.  4,  9  =  65. 
This  Hebrew  word  is  translated  by  three  Greek 
words  in  the  Septuagint — louo,  nipto,  and  pliino. 
These  Greek  words  are  also  used  occasionally  to 
ti'anslate  other  Hebrew  words. 

2.  The  Greek  word  loiio  occurs  in  the  Septuagint 
in  the  following  places  :  Ex.  ii.  5,  xxix.  4,  xl.  12; 
Lev.  viii.  6,  xiv.  8,  9,  xv.  5,  6,  7,  8,  10,  11,  13,  16, 
18,  21,  22,  27,  xvi.  4,  24,  16,  28,  xvii.  15,  16,  xxii.  6; 
Num.  xix.  7,  8,  19;  Deut.  xxiii.  ii  ;  Ruth  iii.  3; 
2  Sam.  xi.  2,  xii.  20  ;  i  Kings  xxii.  38  ;  2  Kings 
V.  10,  12,  13  ;  Ps.  vi.  6;  Isa.  i.  16  =  38. 

3.  The  Greek  word  nipto  is  used  in  Gen.  xviii. 
4,  xix.  2,  xxiv.  32,  xliii.  24,  31  ;  Ex.  xxx.  18,  19,  20, 
21  ;  Lev.  XV.  11,  12;  Deut.  xxL  6;  Judges  xix.  21  ; 
I  Sam.  xxv.  41  ;  2  Sam.  xi.  8  ;  2  Chron.  iv.  6 ;  Ps. 
xxvi.  6,  Iviii.  10,  Ixxiii.  13  =  19. 

4.  The  Greek  word  pliuio  is  used  in  Ex.  xxix. 
17;  Lev.  i.  9,  xiv.  8,  9,  xv.  5,  6,  7,  8,  10,  11,  13,  17, 
22,  27;  Num.  xix,  7,  8,  10,  19,  21  ;  2  Chron.  iv.  6; 
Isa.  iv.  4  =:  21. 

In  the  English  Version  the  Hebrew  word  is 
sometimes  translated  zvasJi  and  sometimes  batiic. 

5.  It  is  translated  ivasJi  in  Gen.  xviii.  4,  xix.  2, 
xxiv.  32,  xliii.  24,  31  ;  Ex.  ii.  5,  xxix.  4,  17,  xxx. 
18,  19,   20,  2T,  xl.  12.  30,  31,   32  ;  Lev.   i.    9,  viii.  6, 


I  lo    The  Meaning  and  Pozve?'  of  Baptism. 

xiv.  8,  9,  XV.  i6,  XVI.  4,  24,  xxii,  6;  Deut.  xxi.  6 
xxiii.  11;  Judges  xix.  21;  Ruth  iii.  3;  i  Sam. 
XXV.  41  ;  2  Sam.  xi.  2,  8,  xii.  20;  i  Kings  xxii.  3S  ;  2 
Kings  V.  10,  12,  13;  2  Cliron.  iv.  6  bis ;  Ps.  xxvi. 
6,  Iviii.  10,  Ixxiii.  13  ;  Pro  v.  xxx.  12  ;  Cant.  v.  3, 
12;  Isa.  i.  16,  iv.  4;  Ezek.  xvi.  4,  9  =  48. 

6.  It  is  translated  bathe  in  Lev.  xv.  5,  6,  7,  8,  10, 
II,  13,  18,  21,  22,  27,  xvi.  26,  23,  xvii.  15,  16;  Num. 
xix.  7,  8,  19  =  18. 

The  Hebrew  word  is  translated  ivasJi  nearly 
three  times  as  often  as  it  is  translated  bathe. 
"  Why  our  translators  have  rendered  the  word 
ivasJi  in  one  case,  and  batJie  in  another,"  says 
Stuart,  "  it  is  difficult  to  see."  He  adds:  "Nei- 
ther ivastiiug  wor  battling  appears  to  be  the  same  as 
plunging  ov  immersing'''  (p.  340).  The  word  is  ap- 
plied to  washing  the  face,  the  hands,  the  feet,  and 
sometimes  the  whole  body.  It  docs  not  express 
modal  action.  Nothing  depends  on  the  manner  of 
using  the  Vv'ater.  It  does  not  express  a  specific 
act,  to  dip,  but  the  general  idea  of  washing.  It 
is  applied  to  washing  the  face  in  Gen.  xliii.  31  ; 
the  hands  in  Deut.  xxi.  6,  Ps.  xxvi.  6,  Ixxiii.  13; 
the  feet  in  Gen.  xviii.  4,  xix.  2,  xxiv.  32,  xliii. 
24,  Judges  xix.  21,1  Sam.  xxv.  41  ;  and  the  hands 
and  feet  in  Ex.  xxx.  19,  20,  21.  Prof.  Stuart  says : 
*'  We    fmd  no   example    among  all  the    Levitical 


Baptisms  in  the  Scptnagint.  1 1 1 

washings  or  ablutions  where  immersion  of  the 
person  is  required  "  (p.  341).  Dr.  Dale  says  : 
"  There  is  no  evidence  of  Jewish  ritual  purifica- 
tion through  all  the  period  of  the  Law — fifteen 
hundred  years — by  dipping  the  entire  person  in 
water"  ("  Jud.  Bap.,"  p.  366). 


THE  BAPTISM  OF  JUDITH. 

Judith  xii.  7  :  "  And  baptized  herself  in  the  camp 
at  the  fountain  of  water." 

This  patriotic  lady,  the  heroine  of  the  stor}', 
noted  for  her  beaut}',  her  piety,  and  her  courage, 
had  undertaken  the  deliverance  of  her  native  city, 
Bethulia,  in  the  north  of  Palestine,  from  the  siege 
of  the  Assyrian  army.  Making  due  preparation, 
she  went,  accompanied  by  her  maid,  to  the  camp 
of  the  enemy.  She  obtained  an  introduction  to 
Holofernes,  the  Assyrian  general,  and,  to  cover 
her  design,  offered  to  give  him  such  information 
that  he  could  easily  capture  the  cit}'.  She  scrupu- 
lously declined  to  eat  at  his  table,  and  partook 
only  of  her  own  provisions.  She  also  obtained 
permission  to  go  out  at  night  into  the  valley  for 
prayer.'  As  a  preparation  for  pra3'er,  she  purified 
herself  by  the  use  of  spring-water.  This  puri- 
fication was   her  baptism.     The   passage   is  thus 


1 1 2     The  Meaning  and  Pcnver  of  Baptism. 

translated  by  Prof.  Stuart:  ''  She  zvent  ont  by  m'ght 
into  the  valley  of  Bcthittia,  rt;.v^  WASHED  HERSELF  in 
the  canip  at  the  foujitain  of  iua:'er''  (p.  30S),  Tiiis 
gives  the  true  meaning.  But  Dr.  Carson  trans- 
lates, ''She  dipped  herself  (p.  yy).  Dr.  Conant 
translates  it  "immersed  herself,"  and  he  says: 
"  There  was  evidentl}'  no  lack  of  water  for  the  im- 
mersion of  the  body  after  the  Jewish  manner — 
namely,  by  v/alking  into  the  water  to  the  proper 
depth,  and  then  sinking  down  till  the  whole  body 
was  immersed"  (p.  85). 

The  signification  which  these  writers  claim  has 
not  a  single  circumstance  in  its  favor  in  the  narra- 
tive, and  it  is  excluded  by  the  very  language  of 
the  narrator,  and  b}'  all  the  circumstances  under 
which  the  baptism  took  place. 

1.  No  act  IS  expressed  in  the  narrative,  but 
the  condition  of  purification  is  expressed.  "  She 
came  in  clean"  (v.  9).  As  proof  has  been  given 
from  usage,  clear,  direct,  decisive,  and  abundant, 
that  the  word  was  in  current  use  to  denote  puri- 
fication, it  will  naturally  have  its  usual  significa- 
tion here. 

2.  The  idea  of  immersion  is  cxeluded  by  t!ie 
very  language  of  the  narrator.  She  baptized  her- 
self/// tJie  camp  AT  tlie  fountain.  She  did  not  bap- 
tize   herself  in   the   fountain,  but  at  the  fouiitain. 


Bapiis77ts  in  the  Septnagint.  1 13 

The  same  identical  expression  in  the  Gicck  is 
used  in  chap.  vii.  3:  "  The  army  camped  in  the 
t  valley  near  Bethulia,  by  the  fountain,"  In  both 
])laces  the  narrator  employs  the  same  Greek  ex- 
pi-ession,  ini  rfj;  7r?jy?)? — at  tJie  fountain.  As  tlie 
army,  170,000  Ibotmen  and  12,000  horsemen,  did 
not  camp  in  the  fountain,  but  at  or  by  the  foun- 
tain, so  this  Jewish  lady  did  not  baptize  herself 
in  the  fountain,  but,  as  the  narrator  says,  <?/ the 
fountain. 

3.  As  the  writer  does  not  say  that  Judith  dipped 
herself  in  the  spring,  but  baptized  herself  in  the 
camp  at  the  spring,  so  the  presence  of  the  sol- 
diers in  the  camp  by  the  spring  precludes  the  idea 
of  "  the  immersion  of  the  body  "  of  this  Jewish 
lady  in  the  fountain.  We  are  informed  that 
Holofernes,  a  short  time  previous,  "  came  to  the 
fountains  .  .  .  and  took  them,  and  set  garri- 
sons of  men  cf  zvar  over  them''  (vii.  7).  With  great 
appropriateness,  as  well  as  force,  does  Prof. 
Stuart  say  :  "Into  the  fountain  in  the  midst  of 
the  camp  it  is  not  probable  that  she  plunged  "  (p. 
308).  Dr.  Fairbairn  sa3's :  "  Immersion  is  ex- 
cluded by  the  publicity  of  the  scene,  as  well  as  b}" 
the  relation  indicated  to  the  fountain  "  (p.  298). 

4.  The  water  of  the  fountain  was  used  for  the 
purpose  of  drinking  (vii.  13,  20,  21,  22).     This  in- 


Ill     The  T\lea}i{riO  and  Pozvcr  of  B a N ism. 

creases  the  incredibility  of  the  i-Jea  that  the  foun- 
tain would  also  be  used  for  "  the  immersion  of 
the  bodw  '  The  two  ideas  are  incompatible  by 
their  vei'y  rcpulsiveness. 

5.  The  water  of  the  fountain  was  ptire  water, 
and  this  gave  it  the  quality  requisite  for  ceremo- 
nial purification.  Dr.  Conant  sa3-s :  "  She  went 
to  the  spring,  because  she  had  there  the  means  of 
immersing-  herself.  An}^  other  use  of  water  for 
purification  could  have  been  made  in  tlie  tent." 

The  reply  to  this  is  twofold:  First,  if  immer- 
sion were  the  object,  she  could  have  had  enough 
for  that  purpose  in  the  tent.  Second,  it  was  pure 
spring-w^xtQT  that  she  needed.  The  quality  of  the 
spring- water  was  the  reason  why  she  went  to  the 
spring.  If  she  would  not  even  eat  the  provisions 
ol  the  Gentiles,  neither  could  the  water  furnished 
in  Gentile  vessels  by  imclean  hands  answer  the 
pui-pose  of  ceremonial  purification.  It  was  a  re- 
quirement of  the  Jewish  Law  that  the  water  for 
litual  purification  should  be  "living  water"  (Lev. 
xi\\5o,  52;  Num.  xix.  17).  Joscphus  employs 
the  same  word  spring  or  fountain  to  denote  the 
water  required  for  a  ceremonial  purification. 
Tlicre  is  a  cleansing  quality  in  pure  water  by 
which  it  lias  a  power  to  baptize  ceremonially  or 
symbolically  in  whatever  wa}'  applied. 


Bap/ ! 3 VIS  in  tJie  Sepiiiagint.  1 1 5 

6.  Tlicie  was  a  [general  custom  in  Oriental  coun- 
tries to  wash  the  hands  before  prayer,  whicli  b}'  Cle- 
ment is  called  a  baptism.  Clement  calls  the  hand- 
washing- of  Te'.emachusa  baptism,  referring  to  Ho- 
mer's statemenL  that  "  Telemachus,  having  washed 
his  hands  of  the  hoar_y  sea,  prayed  to  INlinerva." 

Hesiod  admonishes  "never  with  unwashed 
hands"  to  worship  "Zeus  or  the  other  immor- 
tals." lie  also  forbids  to  pass  "a  stream  on  foot 
before  washing  the  hands  in  it,  with  prayer " 
(Smith,  "  Die.  Christ.  Ant.,"  Vol.  I.  p.  758). 

Ovid  teaches  "  the  washing  of  hands,  and  the 
sprinkling  of  the  head  with  water,  before 
prayer  "  ("  Jud.  Bap.,"  p.  374). 

Aristeas  says :  "  It  is  customar}^  for  all  the  Jews 
to  wash  their  hands  with  sea-water  when  they 
would  pray  to  God"  (p.  374). 

Philo  sa3-s :  "  It  is  the  custom  of  nearly  all  oth- 
ers to  sprinkle  themselves  with  pure  watei",  many 
with  that  of  the  sea,  some  with  that  of  rivers,  and 
some  v.'ith  that  which,  in  vessels,  they  have  drawn 
up  from  wells"  (p.  374). 

Chrysostom  says:  "  It  is  the  custom  for  fountains 
to  be  placed  in  the  courts  of  houses  of  prayer, 
that  they  who  arc  going  to  pray  to  God  may  first 
wash  their  hands,  and  so  life  them  up  in  prayer" 
("  Die.  Christ.  Ant.,"  I.  p.  759). 


1 1 6     The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism.  \ 

i 

There  is    no    "Jewish    custom   of  walking-  into  \ 

the  water  to  the  proper  depth,  and   then  sinking  ' 
down  till  the  whole  body  is  immersed  "  ;  but  the 

custom  of  washing  the   hands  before  prayer  was  ; 

an  Oriental  custom   of  wide  and   general   preva-  , 

lence,  of  which    more    examples    are    given    in  i 

Smith's  "  Dictionary  of  Christian  Antiquities."  j 

ISA.  XXI.  4:  i 
"  Iniquity  baptizes  me."  j 
This  is  an  exainple  of  the  secondai-y  use  of  the 
word,  expressing  a  specific  condition,  correspond- 
ing to  the  nature  of  the  baptizing  power.     The  1 
specific  influence  of  wine  drunk  is  to  intoxicate. 
The    specific   influence  of   an  opiate  drug   is   to  ! 
stupefy.     The  specific  influence  of  pure  water  is  \ 
to  purify.     The  specific  influence  of  iniquity  over  ' 
a  person  waked  up  to  a  consciousness  of  guilt  is 
to  terrify.     The  Hebrew  word  which  the  Septua-  \ 
gint  translates  "baptiae"   means  to  affriglit.     The  ' 
English  Version  of  the  Hebrew  is,   "  Fearful ness  I 
affrights  me."     This  condition  of  terror  the  Sep-  : 
tuagint  expresses  by  the  word  baptize :  "  Iniquity  i 
baptizes  me  "—i.e.,  brings  me  into  a  condition  of  ' 
terror.     We  cannot  translate  the  word  by  a  verb  ; 
of    modal    action.      We    cannot    say,    "  Iniquity  i 
pours    me"  (Williams),  or   "Iniquity  dips    me,"  ! 


Baptisms  in  the  Septiiagint.  1 1 7 

as  the  theory  of  Dr.  Carson  requires.  lie  him- 
self is  here  obliged  to  abandon  his  modal  word 
and  say :  "  His  sin  .  .  .  sunk  him  in  misery," 
and  "would  sink  him  eternall}',  ...  if  not 
delivered  by  that  which  is  represented  in  the 
baptism  of  Christians "  (p.  86).  Even  so.  The 
word  baptizo  does  not  itself  withdraw  that  which 
it  places  under  the  power  of  the  baptizing'  cle- 
ment. The  condition  of  baptism  has  no  self-ter- 
mination. It  may  continue  "  eternally."  The 
word  does  not  mean  dip — putting  an  object  into 
a  fluid  or  any  element  for  a  moment,  and  then 
taking  it  out ;  it  leaves  its  object  under  the 
power  of  the  element,  where  it  would  remain 
without  limit  of  duration,  unless  some  other  influ- 
ence should  take  it  out  of  that  condition. 

In  this  instance  the  prophet  is  describing  the 
scene  at  the  feast  of  Belshazzar  in  Bab3'lon,  at 
the  time  of  the  capture  of  the  city  by  Cyrus.  As 
the  king  gazed  upon  the  handwriting  on  the  wall 
and  read  his  doom,  a  consciousness  of  his  guilt 
sent  terror  to  his  heart.  '^Iniquity  baptizes  vie'' 
"  brings  me  into  a  complete  condition  of  terror^ 
The  passage  is  easy  of  explanation  on  Dale's 
theory,  that  baptizo  expresses  condition,  the  nature 
of  the  condition  being  determined  by  tiie  nature 
cf  the  baptizing  power. 


1 18    The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism, 

2    KINGS   V.   14  : 

"  Then  went  lie  down,  and  baptized  hiinself 
seven  times  in  Jordan." 

The  Hebrew  word  in  tins  passage  is  tabal, 
whose  primary  and  most  frequent  meaning  is  to 
dip,  and  so  the  English  Version  translates  the  word. 
But  the  Septuagint  employs  the  word  baptizo, 
and  the  question  is  whether  they  used  the  word 
in  this  place  to  denote  the  definite  act  to  dip,  or 
in  the  secondary  signification  to  purify.  There 
are  reasons  for  believing  that  they  used  it  in  the 
secondary  meaning. 

I.  In  all  other  places  where  the  Hebrew  word 
tabal  is  used  in  its  primary  signification,  to  dip,  the 
Seventy  use  the  Greek  word  bapto.  They  employ 
bapto  to  translate  tabal  in  Ex.  xii.  22;  Lev.  iv. 
6,  17,  ix.  9,  xiv.  6,  16,  51;  Num.  xix.  18;  Deut. 
xxxiii.  24;  Josh.  iii.  15;  Ruth  ii.  14;  i  Sam.  xiv. 
27;  2  Kings  viii.  15;  Job  ix.  31 — fourteen  times. 
Bapto,  then,  is  their  uniform  word  elsewhere  to 
express  the  primary  signification  ot  the  Elebrew 
word.  The  use  of  a  different  word  in  this  place 
indicates  a  difference  in  their  understanding  of 
the  idea  to  be  conveyed.  They  must  have  had 
some  reason  for  choosing  this  word  rather  than 
the  other.  They  rejected  the  word  bapto,  to  dip, 
and  selected  baptizo;  and  for  the  rejection  of  the 


Baptisms  in  the  Septuagint.  1 1 9 

usual  word  and  the  selection  of  a  different  word 
they  must  have  had  a  reason  in  the  view  they 
took  of  the  different  significations  of  th.c  two 
words. 

2.  This  is  confirmed  by  the  fact  that  in  other 
passages  they  recognized  a  secondary  meaning 
to  the  Hebrew  word  tabal,  and  selected  a  Greek 
word  that  Avould  express  tlie  change  in  the  mean- 
ing. We  have  an  example  of  this  secondary  use 
of  tabal  in  Gen.  xxxvii.  31,  where,  in  the  judg- 
ment of  the  Seventy,  the  Hebrew  word  tabal  has 
the  secondary  meaning  to  stain.  In  that  passage 
they  reject  the  word  bapto  and  select  the  Greek 
word  moluno,  to  stain  :  "  And  the}'  took  Joseph's 
coat,  and  killed  a  kid  of  the  goats,  and  stained  the 
coat  with  the  blood." 

There  are  two  facts  in  their  translation  which 
show  that  they  did  not  understand  that  the  coat 
was  "  dipped  in  the  blood,"  as  the  English  Ver- 
sion gives  it,  but  "stained  with  the  blood."  First, 
they  employ  the  Greek  word  inoluno,  whose  mean- 
ing is  to  stain  (Liddcll  and  Scott) ;  second,  they  use 
the  Greek  word  translated  blood  in  the  dative  case 
without  the  preposition — the  instrumental  dative 
— to  denote  the  instrument  or  means  by  wdiich 
the  coat  was  stained.  In  Ezek.  xxiii.  15  they  use 
the    v/ord  parabapto  in    the    sense  to  dye,   where 


1 20    The  ]\I caning  and  Power  of  Dap  I  ism, 

also  ihc  Hebrew  word  has  the  same  secondai"y 
meanuig'.  la  i  Chron.  xxvi.  ii,the  Seventy  em- 
body the  Hebrew  word  tabal  in  a  proper  name. 
Gesenius  translates  it,  "  Whom  Jehovah  has  im- 
mersed— i.e.,  Jias purified"'  ("  Heb,  and  Eng.  Lex.," 
p.  385).  A  tendency  in  the  Hebrew  word  to  the 
meaning  to  p2irify  is  thus  recognized.  The  only 
remaining  example  is  in  the  passage  before  us; 
and  the  fact  that  the  Seventy  employ  a  change 
of  word  elsewhere  to  express  a  change  from 
the  primary  to  a  secondary  meaning  confirms 
the  opinion  that  the  reason  which  induced 
them  here  to  make  a  change  in  the  translat- 
ing word  was  their  understandin.'r  of  a  chansre 
in  the  meaning  of  the  Hebrew  word  in  this 
place. 

3.  The  prophet  Elisha  did  not  employ  tlie  word 
tabal  in  his  direction  to  Naaman  (2  Kings  v.  10), 
but  the  word  raJiats,  He  did  not  command  him 
to  dip,  but  to  zvash.  The  Septuagint  also  trans- 
lates the  command  in  v.  10  by  louo,  to  ivash.  The 
same  words  were  used  by  both  Naaman  and  his 
servants  in  v.  12,  13.  Dr.  Carson  at  last  recog- 
nizes the  generic  meaning  of  louo:  "That  the 
word  does  not  necessarily  express  mode,  I  readily 
admit "  (p.  486). 

4.  It  ii  in  proof  that  the  v/ord  bapLizo  means 


Baptisms  in  the  Septuagitit.  121 

purify.  For  all  these  reasons  it  ma}'  have  this 
meaning  here. 

In  "  Thcodosia  Ernest,"  American  Baptist  Pub- 
lication Society,  p.  130,  it  is  said  that  "  tabal  is  in 
this  Jew  Greek  uniformly  rendered  by  '  bapto  '  or 
'  baptizo,'  and  these  words  are  never  used  in  any 
other  than  their  common  classical  signification." 

These  statements  are  both  of  them  erroneous, 
and  indicate  the  need  of  more  accurate  and 
thorough  investigation.  First,  the  word  tabal  is 
translated  moliuio  in  Gen.  xxxvii.  31,  with  the 
secondary  meaning  to  stain.  It  is  translated /<^r«- 
Ijapto  in  Ezek.  xxiii.  15,  with  the  secondary  mean- 
ing to  dye.  Second,  the  word  baptizo  is  used  in  the 
secondar}^  signification  to  purify  in  unnumbered 
examples  in  Hellenistic  Greek  usage,  some  of 
which  are  cited  in  the  second  chapter  of  this 
book.  The  reasons  in  favor  of  this  secondary 
meaning  in  2  Kings  v.  14  are : 

1.  This  is  the  correct  signification  of  the  word 
in  its  religious  usage,  as  unnumbered  examples 
demonstrate. 

2.  This  is  the  meaning  of  the  words  employed 
by  the  prophet  Elisha  in  his  command  to  Naa- 
man,  in  Hebrew,  Greek,  and  English,  and  the 
same  words  are  repeated  b}^  Naaraan  and  by  his 
servant. 


1 2  2     The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

3.  The  Seventy  give  the  Hebrew  word  tubal 
secondary  significations  in  their  transhition  of  it 
in  other  places. 

4.  When  the  Seventy  understand  tahal  to  have 
its  primary  signification,  to  dip.,  elsewhere,  they 
uniformly  translate  it  b_v  the  Greek  word  bapto ; 
and  if  they  had  so  understood  it  here,  bapto 
would  have  been  their  word  to  express  it. 

5.  The  selection  of  baptizo  in  this  place  in  prefer- 
ence to  bapto  shows  that  they  understand  tubal  to 
have  a  meaning  here  which  bapto  would  not 
express,  but  which  baptizo  does  express — viz., 
purificatio7i. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

SECONDARY    MEANING   IN   THE   LEXICONS. 

A  S  the  lexicons  give  the  meaning  of  words, 
•^^*"  great  efforts  have  been  made  to  make  it 
appear  that  the  lexicons  give  to  the  Greek  word 
baptizo  only  one  meaning.  The  mystification  re- 
specting the  meaning  which  tlie  lexicons  give  to 
this  word  is  remarkable.  A  secondary  meaning 
is  given  in  the  lexicons ;  but  this,  in  various 
ways,  is  either  denied  or  kept  out  of  view.  A 
brief  consideration  is,  therefore,  given  to  this 
topic  in  this  chapter. 

The  secondary  meaning  of  baptizo  cannot  be 
precluded  b}^  the  theory  that  words  have  only  a 
single  meaning.  Some  contend  with  great  ear- 
nestness for  such  a  theory.  The  theory  does  not 
accord  with  the  reality.  Sir  William  Hamilton 
says:  "  Either  the  words  of  a  language  must  each 
denote  only  a  single  notion  .  .  .  or  a  plurality 
of  concepts.  Of  these  alternatives,  the  latter  is 
the  one  which  has  been  universally  preferred ; 
and  accordingly  all  languages  by  the  same  word 
express  a  multitude  of  thoughts,    more   or   less 

123  • 


1 24    The  Afeaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

differing  from  each  other."  President  N.  Porter, 
editor  of  Webster's  Dictionary,  says:  "Without 
discussing-  the  metaph3-sical  question  whether 
there  is  or  can  be  more  than  a  single  meaning 
to  a  word,  .  .  ,  we  accept  the  commonly-re- 
ceived notion  that  one  word  has  several  senses" 
("Bib.  Sacra,"  Vol.  XX.  p.  119). 

Neither  can  the  secondary  meaning  be  pre- 
cluded by  the  tlieory  that  bapto  and  baptizo  are 
synonj-mous  in  meaning.  This  theory  has  been 
often  assumed,  but  it  has  never  been  proved.  As 
an  assumption  it  is  very  unlikely.  If  one  word 
has  but  a  short  lifetime,  another  will  come  in  its 
place  ;  but  two  words  expressing  one  single  idea, 
existing  side  b}'  side  for  several  thousand  years, 
are  not  needed.  The  best  recent  lexicographers, 
whose  mature  judgment  has  been  formed  by  the 
studies  of  a  lifetime,  do  not  favor  such  a  theory. 
Dr.  William  Freund,  author  of  the  "Latin-German 
Lexicon,"  in  his  very  able  preface  says:  "  Every 
word  has  its  own  distinct  and  peculiar  meaning. 
Man}'  words  have  in  their  meanings  so  much  re- 
semblance to  one  another  that  a  superficial  exami- 
nation can  hardly  distinguish  them.  It  is  the 
duty,  therefore,  of  the  internal  histor}-  of  words 
to  hold  up  the  meaning  of  such  words  over 
against    one    another — to    compare    and    to    dis- 


Secondary  Meaning  in  the  Lexicons.     125 

tinguish  them.  This  is  the  synonymous  element  of 
lexicography  "  (Translation  by  Pres.  T.  D.  Wool- 
sey,  "Bib,  Sac,"  Vol.  II.  p.  81).  President 
Porter  says:  "If  no  two  words  have  precisely 
the  same  meaning — and  that  they  have  not  is 
well-nigh  demonstrated  b}^  the  circumstance  that 
two  m  fact  exist — then  to  define  one  by  the  other 
is  to  confuse  rather  than  to  enlighten  the  mind  " 
(XX.  87).  Dr.  Dale  has  thoroughly  refuted  the 
opinion  that  the  two  words  bapto  and  baptizo 
are  equivalent  in  meaning. 

Neither  is  the  secondary  meaning  of  baptizo 
precluded  by  its  derivation  from  bapto.  D\\  Dale 
gives  very  cogent  reasons  for  deriving  it  from 
the  secondary  meaning  of  bapto  ("Johannic  Bap- 
tism," p.  64  seq.)  Bapto  primary  denotes  a  spe- 
cific act,  to  dip ;  bapto  secondary  means  to  dye. 
This  secondary  meaning  does  not  express  a  de- 
finite act,  but  a  condition — a  condition  of  color 
caused  by  an}'  one  of  an}'  number  of  acts  that  are 
competent  to  effect  the  condition.  As  the  secon- 
dary meaning  of  bapto,  so  unlike  the  primary 
meaning,  was  determined  by  examples  of  usage,  so 
the  secondary  meaning  of  baptizo  is  determined 
by  usage,  and  no  mere  a  priori  theory  can  have 
any  force  to  nullify  the  testimony  of  examples 
of  usasre 


1 26    The  Meaning  and  Poiuer  of  Baptism. 

The  testimony  of  the  lexicons  to  the  secon- 
dary meaning  of  baptizo  cannot  be  silenced  by 
merely  quoting  their  testimony  to  its  primary 
meaning.  It  is  a  frequent  practice  of  those  who 
say  the  word  has  only  one  meaning  to  quote  the 
words  that  denote  the  original  meaning,  and  omit 
those  that  express  the  secondary.  Dr.  Carson  is 
not  one  of  those  who  take  this  objectionable 
course.  He  wrote  a  book  to  prove  that  the  word 
"  has  but  one  signification.  .  .  .  It  ahvays  signifies 
to  dip  ;  never  expressing  anytJiing  but  viodey  But 
he  says:  "  I  have  all  the  lexicographers  and  com- 
mentators against  me  in  this  opinion"  (p.  55). 
Prof.  Stuart,  also,  sa3'S  that  this  opinion  "in  re- 
spect to  one  meaning,  and  one  only,"  is  a  position 
"  which  every  lexicon  on  earth  contradicts,  and 
always  must  contradict"  ("Bib.  Rep.,"  Vol.  III. 
p.  384).  Dr.  Dale  says :  "  Lexicographers  give 
'  wash '  and  '  cleanse,'  by  more  than  twentj'  var}^- 
ing  or  repeated  defining  terms,  as  the  secondary 
meaning  of  this  verb  "  ("  Johannic  Baptism,"  p. 
62).  Dr.  Carson,  knowing  that  the  lexicons  were- 
against  him,  made  his  appeal  to  usage.  He  says: 
"  It  is  ahvays  lawful  to  appeal  from  lexicons  to 
the  language  itself"  (p.  56).  This  is  true,  for  the 
meanings  of  words  in  the  lexicons  are  obtained 
from  their  use  in  the  language  ;  and  when  for  any 


Sr(o:uLiry  I\ [caning  in  tJie  Lexicons.     127 

cause  there  is  a  difference  of  opinion  in  respect  to 
the  meaning-  given  in  the  lexicons,  as  in  the  word 
baptizo,  an  appeal  to  the  use  of  the  word  in  the 
language  to  determine  its  meaning  is  needful,  and, 
when  fairly  and  fulh^  made,  is  decisive.  How  far 
Dr.  Carson  succeeded  and  how  far  he  failed  is  not 
here  the  question.  But  of  the  authority  of  the 
lexicons  he  says:  "I  admit  that  lexicons  are  an 
authorit}^  but  they  are  not  an  ultimate  authority. 
Lexicographers  have  been  guided  by  their  own 
judgment  in  examining  the  various  passages  in 
which  a  word  occui-s;  ruid  it  is  still  competent 
for  every  man  -to  have  recourse  to  the  same 
sources,  T/ie  meaning  of  a  word  vmst  nltiuiately 
be  determined  by  an  actual  ins,pcction  of  the  passages 
in  tvJiicli  it  occurs^  as  of  left  as  any  one  chooses  to  dis- 
p2ite  tJie  J2idgment  of  the  lexicographers''  (p.  56). 

Lexicography  is  still  imperfect.  Great  im- 
provements have  been  made  in  recent  years,  but 
the  ideal  of  a  perfect  lexicon  has  not  yet  been 
reached  in  any  language.  The  most  intelligent 
and  appreciative  admirers  of  the  best  and  latest 
lexicons  of  the  Greek,  Latin,  and  English  lan- 
guages do  not  claim  perfection  for  any  one  of 
them,  but  acknowledge  existing  defects,  and  point 
them  out  with  a  view  to  improvements  yet  to  be 
made.     The  most  important  element  in  a  lexicon 


128    The  Meani7ig  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

is  the  definition.  In  this  element  has  been  one  of 
the  deficiencies  of  the  past,  and  in  it  is  one  of  the 
great  improvements  which  the  makers  of  dic- 
tionaries are  exerting  their  best  efforts  to  attain. 
The  very  ideal  of  a  good  definition  is  one  of  the 
ripe  results  of  a  recent  period.  In  treating  of 
this  subject  President  Porter  says:  "It  is  the 
duty  of  the  definer,  first,  to  be  well  assured  that 
he  has  collected  all  the  senses  of  his  words;  then 
that  he  has  expressed  them  in  well-thought  and 
adequate  phrases ;  and  then  that  he  has  arranged 
them  in  the  order  of  their  development  and  his- 
toric growth."  He  insists  that  a  definition  "  in  or- 
dinary cases  cannot  be  given  by  a  single  word,'' 
but  must  be  given  "in  well-chosen  language, 
by  a  compact  and  clearly-uttered  proposition  " 
("  Bib.  Sac,"  Vol.  XX.  pp.  92,  1 19).  The  defects 
in  the  lexical  definitions  of  the  Greek  word  bap- 
tizo  have  been  often  felt,  but  the  attempts  to  rem- 
edy them  have  not  been  very  successful.  Dr. 
Carson  selected  the  single  word  "dip"  to  express 
the  meaning,  but  was  often  obliged  to  abandon  it 
for  words  that  differ  essentially  in  signification,  as 
"  sink  "  and  the  equivocal  word  "  immerse."  Dr. 
Conant,  in  his  definition,  employs  seven  different 
words  which  are  far  from  being  exact  equivalents. 
Dr.  Dale  has  discussed    the   subject    with   great 


Secondary  Meaning  in  the  Lexicons.     129 

ability,  and  has  done  what  has  never  before  been 
done  for  a  revision  of  the  definition.  He  has 
fully  explored  the  original  sources,  and  gathered 
all  the  passages,  not  only  in  classic  but  in  Judaic 
and  Patristic  Greek,  in  which  the  word  occurs, 
and  with  philosophic  insight  has  discerned  and  de- 
veloped the  several  meanings  of  the  word,  the 
primary  and  the  secondar}',  in  the  natural  order 
of  their  growth.  (See  "  Johan.  Bap.,"  pp.  59-68; 
-Jud.  Bap.,"  p.  57;  "C.  B.,"p.354). 

President  Porter  says  :  "  The  definitions  should 
be  illustrated  by  quotations.  .  .  .  Woi'ds  are 
made  for  sentences ;  they  have  their  life  and 
meaning  from  their  connection  ;  and  it  is  only  as 
seen  in  living  and  connected  discourse  that  their 
import  or  use  can  be  fully  understood.  By  all 
means,  then,  let  us  have  illustrative  quotations, 
given  freely  and  variously  "  ("  Bib.  Sac,"  XX. 
121).  In  the  second  chapter  of  this  book  nearly 
a  hundred  quotations  are  given  from  the  works  of 
Dale,  in  which  the  word  baptizo  occurs  more  than 
a  hundred  times  in  the  secondary  meaning — puri- 
fication— besides  other  quotations  in  other  chap- 
ters, and  the  number  could  easily  be  doubled. 
Most  of  these  quotations  are  so  clear  and  decisive 
that  they  must  carry  conviction  to  ever}^  mind 
that  gives  them  fair  consideration.     They  put  it 


130    The  Meaning  and  Pozver  of  Baptism. 

ill  the  power  of  each  one  to  form  an  independent 
judgment  of  his  own.  The  quotations  are  the 
primar}^  source  of  knowledge  on  wliich  the  lexi- 
cons are  founded.  But  the  lexicons,  though 
secondary  in  authority,  possess  a  value  which 
will  justify  a  few  citations  from  such  as  are  held 
in  high  estimation.  It  is  said  that  sixty  lexicons 
were  quoted  in  a  recent  debate  on  baptism. 
Whether  more  enlightenment  or  more  bewilder- 
ment ensued  does  not  appear.  A  selection  of 
original  quotations  from  the  works  of  Dale,  with 
the  testimony  ot  a  few  of  the  best  lexicons  fairly 
considered  and  duly  weighed,  would  be  sufficient 
to  determine  and  settle  the  secondary  meaning. 
The  testimony  of  a  few  of  the  numerous  lexicons 
which  give  this  meaning  is  here  presented. 

I.  Robinson,  in  his  "Greek  and  English  Lexi- 
con of  the  New  Testament,"  the  standard  lexi- 
con in  use  in  this  country  and  in  other  parts  of 
Christendom,  after  referring  to  its  classic  use, 
gives  as  its  meaning  in  the  New  Testament  to 
zvasJi,  to  lave,  to  cleanse  by  zvashiiig,  to  administer  the 
rite  of  baptism ;  and  he  gives  four  reasons  to 
show  that  "  in  Hellenistic  usage,  and  especially 
in  reference  to  the  rite  of  baptism,  it  would  seem 
to  have  expressed  not  always  simply  iinmersiony 
but  tlic  more  general  idea  of  ablution  or  affusion!' 


Secondary  Meaning  in  the  Lexicons.     1 3 1 

2.  Scapula,  in  his  "  Greek  and  Latin  Lexicon,' 
having  given  the  primary  meaning  inergo,  etc., 
also  gives  the  secondary  meaning,  abluo,  lavo. 
What  does  abhto  mean  ?  We  turn  to  the  "  Latin- 
English  Lexicon"  of  F.  P.  Leverett,  *' compiled 
from  the  lexicons  of  Facciolati  and  Forcellini, 
Scheller,  Luenemann,  and  Freund,"  and  observe 
that  it  gives  as  the  definition  of  abluo,  to  wash,  to 
wash  off,  to  make  clean,  to  purify.  The  definitions 
given  of  lavo  are  to  ivash,  to  bat  he  ^  to  besprinkle,  to 
bedezu. 

3.  Wahl  gives  as  its  second  meaning  vititco,  lavo. 
What  does  vItitoo  mean  ?  Liddell  and  Scott  de- 
fine it  to  zvash,  to  purge,  to  cleanse,  to  piirify. 

4.  Bretschneider,  who  draAvs  his  illustrations 
more  from  Hellenistic  Greek  than  some  lexico- 
graphers, who  draw  more  from  classic  Greek, 
gives  as  its  first  meaning  lavo,  abluo,  to  purify. 

5.  Schleusner  gives  as  its  second  meaning  abluoy 
lavo,  aqua  piirgo.  We  will  turn  this  time  to  the 
"  Latin-English  Lexicon  "  of  E.  A.Andrews,  found- 
ed on  the  "  Larger  Latin-German  Lexicon  of  Dr. 
William  Freund."  This  lexicon  defines  abluo,  to 
remove  filth  by  zvasJiing,  to  zoash  aivay,  to  cleanse  or 
purify.  It  defines  lavo,  to  zvash^  bathe,  lave ;  to 
zvct,  moisten,  bedezv ;  to  zuash  azvay.  And  it  defines 
pur  go,  to  male  clean  or  pure,  to  clean,  cleanse,  purify. 


1 3  2    The  Mean  hig  and  Power  of  Baptism, 

6.  Suidas  gives  .  .  .  lavo,  abluo,  pitrgo,  inimdo. 
Andrews  defines  nnindo,  to  make  clean,  to  clean,  to 
cleanse. 

7.  Parkhurst  gives  as  one  of  its  secondary 
meanings,  to  baptize,  to  luash  in  or  ivith  water  in 
token  of  purification  from  sin. 

8.  Hermann  Cramer,  professor  in  the  Univer- 
sity of  Greifswalde,  in  his  "  Biblico-Theological 
Lexicon,"  the  latest  which  has  appeared  in  Ger- 
many, translated  in  Edinburgh,  and  introduced 
into  this  country  (bearing  date  1872),  p.  418,  says 
that  " paTtri^eiv  was  used  for  the  New  Testa- 
ment washing  in  order  to  publication, "  and  that 
"Xovsiv  serves  in  some  passages  to  give  promi- 
nence to  the  full  import  of  ^aTrri^eiv,  which  had 
become  a  technical  term,  or  (as  in  Rev.  i.  5)  to 
denote  purification  generall}-." 

9.  Other  lexicons  give  the  definition  ablno,  to 
purify,  among  which  are  the  eminent  names  of 
Schrevelius,  Hedericus,  Stockius,  Schoetgen, 
Suicer,  and  others. 


CHAPTER  VIT. 

BIBLICAL   SCHOLARS. 

The  opinions  of  eminent  Biblical  scholars  are 
entitled  to  respectful  and  thoughtful  considera- 
tion. Sometimes,  however,  an  undue  reliance  is 
placed  upon  the  authority  of  great  names.  When 
good  and  learned  men  differ  in  opinion,  we  must 
exercise  the  primal  right  and  dut}'  of  every  man 
to  consider  the  reasons  of  adjust  opinion,  if  v/e 
would  arrive  at  the  essential  truth. 

Immersionists  have  often  put  forth  the  claim 
that  they  have  all  the  learning  and  scholarship 
that  is  worthy  of  respect  in  favor  of  the  opinion 
that  the  Greek  word  baptizo  has  only  one  mean- 
ing, to  iuwiersc.  This  claim  has  no  foundation, 
and  has  no  weight  Avith  those  who  are  well  in- 
formed, and  who  look  beyond  mere  opinions  to 
the  evidence.  Nor  would  it  here  be  noticed 
were  it  not  for  the  misrepresentation  which 
is  often  made  of  the  views  of  eminent  scholars 
who  do  not  believe  in  the  theory  of  "one  mean- 
ing, and  one  only,"  to  this  word.     The  use  which 


T  34    TJie  Meajting  and  Poiucr  of  Baptism. 

is  raade  of  the  name  of  Prof.   Stuart  is  especially 
surprising-. 

Moses  Stuart  has  been  called  "the  father  of 
sacred  literature  in  this  country."  As  the  leader 
in  that  revival  of  Biblical  study  whose  influence 
is  now  felt  in  every  land,  he  will  be  held  in  im- 
mortal honor.  As  he  made  the  Word  of  God  the 
supreme  authority  for  his  own  religious  belief,  so 
he  sought  to  arouse  the  minds  of  his  pupils  to  the 
earnest  and  independent  study  of  the  inspired 
volume,  in  the  free  exercise  of  their  powers,  ac- 
countable only  to  its  Author.  His  chief  excel- 
lence as  an  instructor  consisted  in  awakening  an 
enthusiasm  in  the  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures 
by  the  best  methods  and  for  the  highest  and 
most  sacred  purposes.  He  did  not  teach  his 
pupils  to  rely  merely  on  his  opinions,  but  to  test 
all  opinions  by  the  Word  of  God,  making  use  of 
all  the  helps  which  can  aid  in  the  understanding 
of  its  meaning.  He  expected  there  would  be 
progress  and  improvement  in  the  knowledge  of 
Biblical  subjects  after  his  time.  Yet  his  name 
adds  weight  to  the  views  which  he  published  to 
the  world.  This  has  been  a  temptation,  which 
some  immersionists  have  not  been  able  to  resist, 
to  claim  him  on  their  side  of  the  baptismal  ques- 
tion.    In  his  treatise  on  the  "  Mode  of  Baptism  " 


Biblical  Scholars.  135 

he  went  to  the  bottom  of  the  subject,  and  gave 
first  the  original  signification  of  the  word,  and 
then  gave  the  secondary  meanings.  But  in  nu- 
merous instances  they  have  quoted  what  he  says 
on  the  original  meaning  of  the  word,  and  have 
suppressed  what  he  says  of  the  other  meanings, 
representing  him  as  teaching  that  the  word  has 
only  one  meaning. 

Prof.  Stuart's  article  on  the  "  Mode  of  Bap- 
tism "  was  published  in  the  third  volume  of  the 
Biblical  Repository  in  1833,  and  republished  the 
same  year  in  a  pamphlet.  In  giving  some  of 
his  testimony  to  the  secondary  meaning  of  bap- 
tize, references  will  be  made  to  the  pages  of 
both.  In  each  reference  the  first  number  will 
refer  to  the  page  in  the  Repository,  the  second 
to  the  page  in  the  pamphlet. 

I.  Prof  Stuart  teaches  that  baptizo  has  more 
than  one  meaning. 

Under  "Classical  Usage"  he  discusses  the 
meanings  of  both  words,  bapto  and  baptizo,  and, 
having  given  their  first  meanings,  dip,  plunge,  im- 
nicrge,  sink,  he  says:  "But  there  are  variations 
from  this  usual  and  prevailing  signification"; 
and,  after  giving  illustrations,  he  says:  "In  all 
the  derived  or  secondary  meanings  of  both  bapto 
and    baptizo    .   .    .   the    Greek    writers   made    a 


136   TJie  Jlfca n iug  and  Power  cf  Baptism . 

diverse  and  distinct  use  of  the  words,  never  con- 
founding them  "  (p.  306;  p.  22). 

Under  "  Septuagint  Usage"  he  says:  "Some 
of  the  classical  meanings  of  these  words  are  not 
to  be  found  in  the  books  aforesaid;  while  otJicr 
meanings — viz.,  to  ivasli,  to  bcdcxv  or  moisten — are 
more  clearly  and  fully  exhibited  "  (p.  308  ;  p.  24). 

As  he  says  of  the  first  meaning :  "  All  lexico- 
graphers and  critics  of  any  note  are  agreed  in 
this,"  so  of  the  theory  that  the  word  has  "one 
meaning,  and  one  only,"  he  says  it  is  a  position 
"  which  every  lexicon  on  earth  contradicts,  and 
always  must  contradict"  (p.  384;  p.  100). 

2.  Prof.  Stuart  teaches  that  the  meaning  of 
baptizo  in  its  religious  usage  is  purification. 

Among  the  several  meanings  in  the  Septuagint 
he  gives:  "5.  To  zvash,  cleanse  by  zuater,  where 
baptizo  is  used  "  (p.  308  ;  p.  24). 

He  gives  the  same  meaning  in  his  translations: 

Judith  xii.  7  :  "  SJiezvent  cut  by  night,  into  the  val- 
ley of  Bethulia,  and  WASHED  herself  in  the  camp  at 
the  fountain  of  ivatcr'' 

Sirach  xxxiv.  30:  ''He  zvho  is  CLEANSED /r<?;//  a 
dead  \body\  and  toucheth  it  again,  what  does  he 
profit  by  his  washing?  " 

In  Judith  he  translates  baptizo  zcashed,  in  Si- 
rach cleansed. 


Biblical  Scholars.  137 

Tit.  iii.  5  :  ''  He  saved  us  ^j/ //r^  WASHING  [loutron] 
cf  regeneration — i.e.,  by  that  purification  which  re- 
generation confers  "  (p.  ^^fj  \  p.  53). 

The  word  loutron,  which  Stuart  translates  wash- 
ing in  Sirach  and  Titus,  and  explains  in  Titus  as 
signifying  purification,  is  the  word  which  Sirach 
emplo3S  to  denote  the  meaning  of  his  expression, 
"  He  who  is  baptized  from  a  dead  body." 

Eph.  V.  26:  "-Having  cleansed  it  by  the  WASHING 
[loutron]  of  luater  by  the  ivord.* 

Acts  X.  47 :  "Can  any  man  forbid  water,  that 
these  should  not  be  baptized  ?  "  This  Stuait  ex- 
plains: "Can  any  one  forbid  that  water  should  be 
brought  in  ?  .  .  .  They  were  to  be  baptized 
on  the  spot,  and  water  was  to  be  brought  in  for 
this  purpose  "  (p.  334;   p.  50). 

In  summing  up  tiie  result  of  an  extended  dis- 
cussion he  says :  "  Let  us  return  to  the  rite  of 
baptism.  What  is  it  that  it  signifies?  Pnrifica- 
tion  is  the  answer ;  and  this  is  the  only  Scriptural 
and  consistent  answer  that  we  can  give  "  (p.  367; 

P-  83). 

3.  Prof.  Stuart  does  not  believe  that  baptism 
consists  in  the  mode. 

"  The  mere  mode  cannot  possibly  make  any 
difference  in  the  case  "  (p.  388 ;  p.  104). 

'■^  No  injunction  is  anyzvhere  given  in  the  New  Tes- 


1 3  8    The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism 

tanient  respecting  the  manner  in  wJiieJi  this  rite 
shotdd  be  performed.  If  there  be  such  a  passage, 
let  it  be  produced.  This  cannot  be  done  "  (p. 
365;  P-  81). 

The  opinion  that  "  the  manner  of  the  rite  is  in- 
volved in  the  word  itself"  Prof.  Stuart  rejects, 
and  shows  that  the  mode  is  not  involved  in  the 
meaning  of  the  word.  lie  devotes  twenty  pages 
to  the  argument  in  proof  that  the  mode  of  bap- 
tism is  not  essential. 

4.  Prof.  Stuart  believes  that  baptism  with 
water  is  a  symbol  of  the  purification  of  the  soul 
by  the  Spirit  of  God. 

He  saj's  there  is  a  "  twofold  division  of  the  ex- 
ternal ritual  under  the  ancient  dispensation  and 
under  the  Christian  one — viz.,  into  rites  cmblem- 
atie  of  parity,  and  rites  emblematic  of  atonement 
for  sin'  (p.  370;  p.  86).  On  p.  369,  p.  85,  he 
sa3-s  :  "  Under  the  ancient  dispensation,  the  rites 
were  divided  into  two  great  classes — viz.,  those 
significant  of  purity  or  purification,  and  those  sig- 
nificant of  atonement  for  sin.  .  .  .  Are  not 
the  significant  symbols,  then,  inider  the  new  dis- 
pensation, a  summary  of  those  which  existed 
under  the  old?  The  belief  of  this  spontaneously 
forces  itself  upon  my  mind.  The  work  of  the 
Spirit  is  still  symbolized  imder  the  Gospel;  and 


Biblical  Scholars.  139 

a  Saviour's  blood  is  still  represented.  The  one 
baptism  signifies  ;  the  other  is  as  plainly  indicated 
b}'  the  Lord's  Supper." 

5.  Prof.  Stuart  rejects  the  error  "that  baptism 
is  a  symbol  of  the  death  and  burial  of  Christ." 

It  represents  the  purification  of  the  soul  by  the 
Spirit  of  God.  "  It  is  a  d3-ing  to  sin  and  being 
raised  to  a  new  spiritual  life.  .  .  .  Why  should 
baptism  be  made  symbolical  of  the  death  of 
Christ?  All  Jewish  analogy  is  against  it.  What 
were  all  the  ablutions  and  sprinklings  of  the  ritual 
law  designed  to  prefigure  and  to  signify?  Most 
obviously  we  must  answer,  purification. 
Water,  as  exhibited  in  washing,  sprinkling,  etc., 
is  never  an  emblem  of  death  and  the  grave  "  (p. 
368;  p.  84). 

Of  Rom.  vi.  4,  5  and  Col.  ii.  12  he  says:  "  It  is 
only  moral  or  spiritual  baptism  into  the  death  of 
Christ  of  which  the  apostle  speaks  in  these  two 
passages  "  (p.  370;  p.  86). 

"  It  is  perfectly  clear  that  baptism  is  considered 
as  the  sj^nbol  of  purification.  .  ,  .  It  is  sig- 
nificant of  that  sanctifying  influence  of  the  Spirit 
of  God  which  a  Savior.r's  death  has  procured  " 
p.  368  ;  p.  84). 

6.  Prof.  Stuart  maintains  that  immersion  is  not 
essential  as  a  mode  of  baptism,  but  that  sprinkling 


140    The  Meariing  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

is  a  valid  and  the   most  significant  and  appropri- 
ate mode. 

"Is  it  essential,  in  order  that  baptism  slioiild 
symhoWzQ purificatioji  or  purity,  that  it  should  be 
performed  by  immersion?  Plainly  not;  for  in 
ancient  times  it  was  the  water  which  was  sprin- 
kled upon  the  offending  Jew  that  was  the  grand 
emblem  of  purification  "  (p.  370;  p.  86). 

"  It  is,  then,  a  perfectly  clear  case  that  the 
sprinkling  of  water  or  of  blood  was  altogether 
the  most  significant  mode  of  purification  under 
the  ancient  dispensation.  And  so  the  prophet 
Ezekiel  speaks  of  water  to  be  sprinkled,  under 
the  new  dispensation — Ezek.  xxxvi.  25,  26"  (p. 
371 ;  P-  87). 

"After  the  examples  which  have  been  adduced 
of  the  significancy  of  -sprinkling,  both  from  the 
Old  Testament  and  the  New,  ...  I  consider 
this  significancy  as  a  point  made  out"  (p.  372; 
p.  88). 

Of  certain  passages  in  the  New  Testament 
which  he  discusses  he  says :  "  I  cannot  read 
these  examples  without  the  distinct  conviction 
that  immersion  was  not  practised  on  these  occa- 
sions, but  ivashing  or  affusion  "  (p.  362  ;  p.  78). 

He  concedes  the  "  probability  "  that  the  rite 
was    sometimes    performed    by    immersion,    but 


Biblical  Sc/iolars.  141 

Ihc  main  drift  of  his  argument  is  in  favor  of 
sprinkling-,  of  the  validity  of  which  he  has  no 
doubt,  and  the  greater  appropriateness  and  sig- 
nificancy  of  which  he  conclusively  evinces.  Near 
the  conclusion  he  says:  "  My  belief  is  that  we  do 
obey  the  command  to  baptize  when  we  do  it  by 
affusion  or  sprinkling  "  (p.  3S8 ;  p.  104). 

7.  In  treating  of  the  mode  of  baptism  in  the 
early  ages  of  Christianity  after  the  times  of  the 
apostles,  Prof.  Stuart  says  that  immersion  was 
the  general  practice,  but  that  sprinkling  was  also 
considered  valid.  Fie  quotes  a  long  passage 
from  C3"prian,  and  says:  "  Here,  then,  sprinkling, 
so  early  as  the  former  half  of  the  third  century, 
is  pronounced  to  be  legitimate  and  valid  by  one 
of  the  noblest  men  among  all  the  Christian  fa- 
thers. .  .  .  This  noble  and  liberal  decision  of 
Cyprian  was  confirmed  and  proclaimed  by  seve- 
ral ecclesiastical  councils  not  long  afterwards  " 

(P-  379  ;  P-  95). 

Prof.  Stuart  thinks  undue  stress  is  laid  by  im- 
mersionists  on  the  practice  of  the  early  churches. 
"  If  this  be  authoritative,  then  wh}-  not  be  consis- 
tent and  carry  it  through?"  (p.  382;  p.  98).  "  It 
is  notorious,  and  admits  of  no  contradiction,  that 
baptism  in  those  days  of  immersion  was  admin- 
istered   to   men,    women,  and   children,    ///   puris 


142    The  Afeafiing  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

naturalibus,  naked  as  Adam  and  Eve  before  their 
fall"  (p.  3S1  :  p.  97).  Numerous  other  supersti- 
tious obseivances,  he  also  shows,  would  be  obli- 
gatory on  that  view. 

There  is  much  false  reasoning-  about  the  testi- 
mony of  church  history  on  the  subject  of  bap- 
tism. R.  Robinson's  "  History  of  the  Baptists  " 
is  still  quoted  by  a  certain  grade  of  writers.  Of 
this  book  Prof.  Stuart  says  :  "  I  have  examined  it 
on  various  topics,  and  confess  myself  to  be  great- 
ly disappointed  and  not  a  little  disgusted.  There 
is  ever}^ where  in  it  an  air  of  2\m.ost prof aiie  levity, 
which  at  times  breaks  forth  into  the  most  gross 
and  palpable  indecency.  .  .  .  There  is  such  a 
gross  and  palpable  unfairness  in  Robinson's  ex- 
amination of  the  testimony  of  the  Christian  fa- 
thers, and  such  a  shallow  criticism  both  on  them 
and  on  the  New  Testament,  that  one  may  well 
wonder  that  this  book  should  meet  with  encour- 
agement among  men  of  sobriety  and  good  sense. 
There  is,  indeed,  an  appearance  of  a  kind  of 
learning  in  the  author;  but  it  is  merely  that  of  a. 
literary  gojirmand.  who  has  read  everything  curi- 
ous and  entertaining,  and  but  ver}'  little  that  is 
solid,  and  has  reasoned  and  reflected  still  less  on 
ivJiat  he  furs  read"  (quoted  in  "  Woods  on  Infant 
Baptism,"   2d   cd.,   p.   140).     Some   recent  critics 


I 


Biblical  ScJiolars.  143 

would  become  wiser  if,  instead  of  depending  ou 
such  discredited  authorities  as  R.  Robinson,  they 
would  resort  to  genuine  and  trustworthy  sources 
of  information  on  this  subject. 

Alexander  Carson,  the  ablest  defender  of  the 
theory  of  "one  meaning,  and  one  onl}-,"  to  the 
Greek  word  baptizo,  was  a  contemporai-y  of  Moses 
Stuart,  but  inferior  to  him  in  some  of  the  essential 
qualities  of  a  successful  interpreter.  Ills  defini- 
tion of  baptizo  is  a  lucid  statement  of  the  meaning 
given  to  it  by  the  theor}- :  "//  ahvays  signifies  dip, 
never  expressing  anything  but  mode,"  This  de- 
finition expresses  exactly  the  meaning  of  bapto 
primary,  but  it  does  not  express  the  meaning  of 
baptizo.  The  first  fallacy  in  Dr.  Carson's  reason- 
ing consists  in  transferring  to  the  word  baptizo, 
without  evidence,  the  primary  meaning  of  bapto, 
to  dip,  assuming  that  they  are  equivalent  in  signi- 
fication. Underlying  this  assumption,  and  con- 
nected with  it,  is  the  further  assumption  that  bap- 
tizo must  express  some  definite  act,  to  sprinkle,  to 
ponr,  or  to  dip ;  and  therefore,  like  bapto,  it  must 
mean  dip.  This  is  the  original  fallacy  which 
warps  and  vitiates  all  the  subsequent  reasoning  in 
favor  of  the  theor}-.  The  first  two  examples 
which  Dr.  Carson  gives  furnish  illustration  of 
this  fundamental  error  in  his  conception   of  the 


144    '^■^^^  I\ leaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

meaning  of  the  word.  Of  the  quotation  from 
Polybius,  "  They  marched  through  with  diffi- 
culty, the  infantry  being  baptized  up  to  the 
breasts,"  he  sa3'S,  p.  57:  "  Here  surel}^  the  word 
cannot  mean  pouring  or  sprinkling^  Therefore 
he  infers  that  as  the  word  must  denote  sonic  defi- 
nite act,  and  as  the  act  is  not  that  of  pouring  or 
sprinkHng,  it  must  be  the  act  of  dipping.  But 
there  is  no  action  expressed  by  the  word  baptizo 
in  this  quotation.  The  action,  and  the  (?;//y  action, 
which  Polybius  expresses,  is  the  act  of  marchings 
and  this  action  is  expressed  b}'  another  and  a 
different  word.  Wading  throng] l  a  river  is  quite  a 
different  thing  from  the  act  of  dipping  an  object  in 
the  river.  The  word  baptizo  docs  not  express  the 
action,  but  it  expresses  the  condition  of  the  soldiers 
i)i  iJic  uatcr  while  marching  through  the  river. 
The  word  dip  expresses  an  entirely  different  idea. 
In  the  next  example,  where  Strabo  says:  "The 
army  marched  through  the  entire  day,  baptized 
up  to  the  waist,"  Dr.  Carson  says:  "Surely  this 
baptism  was  immersion,"  Here  comes  another 
fallac}'.  Why  does  he  shift  the  word,  and  substi- 
tute "immersion"  for  "dipping"?  The  word 
di[)  denotes  a  definite  act,  "  to  put  for  a  moment 
ill  an\'  liquid."  But  a  whole  dav  is  too  long  for 
I  he  nujmcntary  act.  to  dip.     Besides,  the  only  act 


Biblical  ScJiolai^s.  145 

of  which  Strabo  speaks  is  the  act  of  marching, 
and  this  is  expressed  .by  a  different  word.  There 
is  no  action  in  the  word  baptizo  in  either  of  these 
examples.  The  baptism  was  an  immersion,  but 
the  immersion  was  not  an  act,  but  the  condition  of 
the  soldici's  in  tJic  zvatcr.  Dr.  Carson  had  not  con- 
sidered the  dilTerence  in  the  meaning;  of  the  two 
words.  When  he  comes  to  the  baptism  of  ships, 
he  substitutes  the  word  "sink"  for  "dip."  The 
ships  have  been  in  a  condition  of  baptism  for  more 
than  a  thousand  years,  but  that  is  too  long  a 
period  for  the  duration  of  the  act  which  is  ex- 
pressed by  the  word  dip,  which  Dr.  Carson  has 
put  into  his  definition,  and  he  employs  another 
word  of  different  meaning. 

The  baptism  in  Isa.  xxi.  4,  "Iniquity  baptizes 
me,"  he  also  expresses  by  the  word  "sink,"  and 
says  it  might  continue  "eternally"  (p.  86).  The 
word  "  immerse  "  in  Euiilish,  like  the  correspond- 
ing word  in  Latin,  sometimes  denotes  an  act,  but, 
apart  from  the  baptismal  question,  it  more  fre- 
quently expresses  condition  without  limit  of  time. 
The  following  examples  will  illustrate  this: 

"After  sixty  years  immersion,  the  gold  looks  as 
fresh  as  if  taken  out  of  the  bank." 

"The  lamp  extinguished,  he  was  immersed  in 
total  darkness." 


1 4  6    Th  e  JMea  n  ing  and  Pow  r  of  Baptism . 

"Iiujucrscd  dacp  in  the  Hood,  he  tound  the  death 
he  had  deserved." 

To  substitute  the  word  "  immerse"  for  the  word 
"dip,"  as  if  they  were  equivalent  iu  significatifjn, 
serves  only  to  mislead.  The  word  "dip"  ex- 
presses a  momentary  act — "  entrance  into  a  fluid, 
Avitli  immediate  return."  The  word  "immerse" 
expresses  condition  which  continues  for  a  long 
period  of  time. 

Dr.  Carson  conducts  his  argument  on  the  prin- 
ciple that  no  second  meaning  of  the  word  shall  be 
admitted  until  some  example  is  adduced  in  which 
the  first  meaning  is  impossible.  lie  often  encoun- 
ters passages  which  tax  his  critical  powers  to  the 
utmost  to  find  some  possible  way  of  explaining 
them  i;:!  accordance  witli  his  theory.  He  ex- 
pends a  vast  amount  of  ingenuity  to  reduce  in- 
tractable passages  to  "  one  meaning,  and  one 
only."  Of  one  notable  example  he  says:  "  I  have 
found  that  baptiso  in  other  instances  signifies  to 
immerse,  and  there  is  a  certainty  that  it  has  this 
meaning  here,  except  it  is  proved  that  it  has  an- 
other signification  somewhere  else.  If  another 
signification  is  found,  I  will  not  insist  that  immer- 
sion must  of  course  be  the  signification  here  "  (p. 
452).  But  he  never  allows  that  "it  has  another 
signification  soincwhcre  elsi  ";  therefore  in  no  case 


B'ibli.al  Scholars,  147 

is  the  secondary  meaning  to  be  admitted.  For  he 
adds:  ^^  Now,  there  is  not  in  all  Greek  literature  a 
single  instanee  ever  alleged  in  ivhieh  this  word  MUST 
have  a  secondary  meaning^  This  is  Dr.  Carson's 
potent  weapon  of  defence  when  he  meets  with 
passages  which  give  him  special  difficulty  in  their 
conflict  with  his  theory.  It  often  leads  him  into 
as  great  extravagance  of  interpretation  as  that 
which  he  himself  exposed  when  he  rejected  the 
notion,  which  had  been  maintained  during  many 
generations,  that  the  Homeric  lake  was  literally 
dipped  in  the  blood  of  a  mouse.  Since  Dr.  Car- 
son's day  a  great  number  of  passages  have  been 
adduced  by  Dr.  Dale  which  to  Dr.  Carson  were 
wholly  unknown.  Some  of  these  are  given  in  the 
second  chapter  of  this  book.  It  is  wholly  unne- 
cessary here  to  repeat  the  argument  there  given 
from  examples  of  usage.  They  fully  meet  the 
demand  of  Dr.  Carson's  principle.  In  the  great- 
er part  of  these  examples  it  is  impossible  to  give 
the  word  its  primary  meaning,  but  from  the  very 
nature  of  the  case  the  zvord  MUST  Jiave  the  secondary 
meaning — purification.  The  lexicographers  are 
right.  They. have  substantiated  this  secondary 
meaning,  and  no  attempt  to  suppress  or  deny  or 
reverse  their  judgment  can  succeed.  The  appeal 
which  Dr.  Carson  made  Irom  the  lexicons  to  the 


148    7"//t'  Meaning  and  Powo'  0/ Baptism. 

lis.ige  ■>{  the  word  has  Jailed  to  disprove  the  se- 
condary meaning,  while  subsequent  and  more 
cmplete  investigation  has  established  that  mean- 
ing on  a  stronger  and  broader  foundation. 

Dr.  Carson,  like  most  immersionists,  failed  to 
(iistinguish  between  the  classical  and  the  Hellen- 
istic significations  of  the  word.  In  its  secular 
use  in  the  classics,  while  it  has  both  primary  and 
secondary  meanings,  the  secondary  meaning,  pu- 
rification, is  rare.  But  in  its  religious  usage, 
as  appropriated  by  the  Greek-speaking  Jews  to 
denote  ceremonial  purification,  and  also  the  spi- 
ritual purification  of  the  soul  by  the  Spirit  of 
God,  and  the  symbol  baptism  with  water  by 
whicli  the  spiritual  is  ritually  represented,  this 
is  the  prevailing  signification  in  Judaic,  Johan- 
nic,  Christie,  and  Patristic  baptisms. 

Dr.  T.  J.  Conant,  BAPTIZEIN,  ed.  1868,  has  | 
published  for  the  American  Bible  Union  the  re-  I 
suit  of  his  investigation  of  this  word.  He  era-  1 
ploys  seven  words  to  express  its  meaning :  to  im-  \ 
mcrse,  iuimergc,  siibjncrgc,  to  dip,  to  plunge,  to  im~ 
bathe,  to  zvhelin  (p.  87).  These  words  differ  much  j 
from  each  other  in  meaning,  )^et  they  unite  in  the 
common  idea  "  that  the  object  was  wholly  cov-  \ 
ered  by  the  enclosing  element"  (p.  159).  He  se-  I 
lects  the  word  iininerse    for    use  in  his  Revision      ■ 


Biblical  Scholars.  149 

of  the  translation  of  the  New  Testament.  On 
p.  loi  he  sa3^s :  "  The  Greek  word  baptizein  ex- 
presses nothing  more  than  the  act  of  immersion'' ; 
and  on  p,  88  he  says:  "  The  word /wz/^^rj-^  .  .  . 
expresses  the  full  import  of  the  Greek  word  BAP- 
TIZEIN. The  idea  of  emersion  is  not  included  in 
the  meaning-  of  the  Greek  word.  It  means 
simply  to  put  into  or  under  water  (or  other  sub- 
stance), without  determining  whether  the  object 
immersed  sinks  to  the  bottom,  or  floats  in  the 
liquid,  or  is  immediately  taken  out."  So  far  as 
the  simple  meaning  of  the  Greek  word  extends, 
it  leaves  its  object  in  the  enclosing  element,  and 
does  not  of  itself  determine  that  it  shall  be 
"taken  out."  The  idea  of  "taking  out"  of  the 
water  the  object  which  is  "put  into  or  under 
water,"  by  the  Greek  word  baptizo,  is  an  idea 
which  is  not  contained  in  the  meaning  of  this 
word,  and  is  not  expressed  by  it.  If  there  be  not 
some  other  cause  to  withdraw  the  object  from  the 
watery  element,  how  is  it  ever  to  be  "  taken 
out"?  What  shall  determine  the  taking  of  the 
object  out  of  the  water  in  any  case  ?  "  This  is 
determined  not  by  the  word  itself."  But  if  "  the 
word  itself"  does  not  determine  the  withdrawal 
of  its  object;  if  in  its  own  intrinsic  meaning,  and 
by  its  own  proper  agency,  it  does  not  withdraw 


1 50     The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

its  object  from  the  water;  if  this  word  does  not  it- 
self, in  its  actual,  current  Greek  usage,  express 
the  taking  out  ?i%  well  as  the  putting  in;  \^  we  must 
resort  to  motives  and  reasons  extrinsic  to  "  the 
word  itself,"  then  "  the  act"  on  which  Dr.  Conant 
insists  as  essential  to  Christian  baptism  is  not  de- 
noted by  this  Greek  w^ord.  The  word  itself  does 
not  determine  whether  the  object  which  is  "put 
into  or  under  water  "  is  to  be  "  taken  out."  He 
says  :  "  This  is  determined,  not  by  the  word  it- 
self, but  by  the  nature  of  the  case,  and  by  the 
design  of  the  act  in  each  particular  case.  A  liv- 
ing being,  put  under  water  without  intending  to 
drown  him,  is  of  course  to  be  immediately  with- 
drawn from  it."  Tne  potent  motive  involved  in 
the  natural  desire  to  avoid  drowning,  to  which 
the  phrase  '"of  course"  adroitly  points,  will 
doubtless  incite  to  take  a  living  being  out  of  the 
water,  if  he  has  been  "put  under  the  water." 
But  the  Greek  word  baptizo,  in  its  classic  usage, 
does  not  take  out  of  the  water  what  it  puts  in. 
"  The  idea  of  emersion  is  not  included  in  tht3 
meaning  of  the  Greek  word."  In  the  New  Tes- 
tament the  Greek  word  baptizo  never  puts  a  liv- 
ing being  under  the  water. 

Dr.    Conant    is    a    distinguished    scholar,    and 
holds  an  honorable  position  as  the  leading  trans- 


Biblical  Scholars.  151 

iator  of  the  Baptist  Revision  of  the  English  Ver- 
sion of  the  New  Testament.  He  has  collected  a 
goodly  number  of  quotations  from  Greek  wiiters 
in  Bx\PTIZElN,  and  says  that  these  "  exhaust  the 
use  of  this  word  in  Greek  literature  "  (p.  vi.)  Jn 
this  he  was  greatly  mistaken,  as  hundreds  of  new 
examples  in  the  works  of  Dj-.  Dale  attest.  The 
Greek  text  of  Dr.  Conant  is  careful! v  and  accu- 
rately edited,  but  his  translations  and  explana- 
tions are  often  unsatisfactory.  His  punctuation 
of  the  Greek  text  in  his  example  221  differs  from 
that  of  the  best  autlioriticr,,  like  the  Abbe  Mignc 
of  Paris,  and  is  cviiienti\-  erroneous,  and  his 
translation  still  moie  so. 

Dr.  James  W.  Dale,  of  Media,  Pennsylvania,  in 
his  "  Inquirj-,"  has  given  the  Greek  word  baptize 
a  more  complete  and  scientific  investigation,  with 
a  result  more  luminous  and  satisfactory,  than  any 
other  scholar.  When  Prof.  Stuart  wrote  his 
treatise  in  1833,  the  amount  of  material  accessible 
to  scholars  in  this  country  was  very  limited.  A 
half-century  of  discussion,  of  research,  of  intense 
mental  activity,  has  given  a  vantagc-gn^und  to 
those  wh.o  have  the  enterprise  to  seize  the  op- 
portunity. The  incessant  and  fruitless  debate  of 
the  baptismal  question  has  revealed  its  weak 
point.     Dr.  Dale  has  had  the  sagacity  to  discover 


152    The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

that  weak  point,  and,  grasping-  the  great  prin- 
ciple that  "  Use  is  of  supreme  authority  and  the 
rule  in  tlie  language,"  he  has  explored  the  whole 
realm  of  Greek  literature,  and  has  found  "  the 
key  which  opens  every  passage  "  and  discloses 
its  meaning.  He  has  collected,  classified,  and 
expounded  all  the  examples  in  which  the  word 
occurs  in  classic  Greek,  all  known  examples  in 
Judaic  Greek,  and  a  mullitudc  in  Patristic  Greek, 
hundreds  of  which  were  never  seen  by  Dr.  Car- 
son or  by  Dr.  Conant.  He  has  had  the  enter- 
prise to  procure  from  Europe  the  original  works 
in  the  best  and  most  approved  editions,  and  has 
made  his  quotations  with  a  fairness  and  an  accu- 
racy which  have  commanded  the  commendation 
of  the  intelligent  among  those  who  differ  most 
widely  from  him  in  opinion.  His  four  splendid 
volumes.  Classic,  Judaic,  Johannic,  Christie  and 
Patristic  Baptism,  have  received  the  encomiums 
of  the  most  eminent  Greek  scholars  in  the  United 
States,  and  awakened  respectful  attention  from 
the  most  intelligent  advocates  of  immersion. - 
His  views  have  received  endorsement  from  forty 
universities,  colleges,  and  theological  seminaries, 
through  more  than  sixty  of  their  professors  and 
presidents,  and  his  works  are  hailed  by  Christian 
scholars  as  a  full,  thorough,  complete,  and  satis- 


Biblical  ScJiolars.  153 

factory  treatment  of  the  Greek  word  baptizo. 
His  works  are  a  thesaurus  of  information  on  the 
subject,  and  his  discussion  of  it  cannot  fail  to 
exert  a  potent  influence  for  the  elimination  of 
error  and  the  establishment  of  the  truth. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

JEWISH    BAPTISMS   IN   THE   NEW   TESTAMENT. 

I  COR.  X.  2  :  "  BAPTIZED  INTO  MOSES." 
Wpien  the  Isrnelites  stood  trembling  with  the 
Red  Sea  before  them,  the  impassable  mountains 
on  either  side,  and  the  hostile  array  of  Pharaoh 
fiercely  menacing  them  behind,  in  their  terror  and 
unbelief  they  poured  their  reproaches  upon  Moses 
for  leading  them  out  of  Egypt,  as  they  said,  "  to 
die  in  the  wilderness  "  ;  and  they  declared  that 
they  would  rather  "serve  the  Egyptians"  than  go 
on  thus  to  inevitable  destruction.  But  when,  the 
next  morning,  they  stood  safe  on  the  other  shore, 
and  beheld  the  destruction  of  the  Egyptians  and 
the  great  deliverance  which  God  had  given  to 
them  by  the  hand  of  jNIoses,  their  state  of  mind 
was  entirely  changed.  Now  "  the  people  feared 
the  Lord,  and  believed  the  Lord  and  his  servant 
Moses."  There  was  in  them  a  thorough  change. 
They  w^ere  baptized  into  Moses.  The  day  before, 
appalled  by  the  terrors  that  encompassed  them, 
they  were  almost  in  a  state   of  rebellion.     But 


yC7i'is/i  Baptisms  in  the  New  Testanuut.    155 

now  there  was  a  complete  change.  The  whole 
nation  had  been  baptized  into  Moses — changed 
iVom  a  state  of  unbelief  into  a  state  of  confidence 
in  Moses  and  devotion  to  him  as  their  leader. 
This  baptism  had  been  accomplished  by  the  di- 
vine interposition  through  the  instrumentalit}^  of 
the  cloud  and  the  sea.  "  The  pillar  of  the  cloud 
went  from  before  their  face,  and  stood  behind 
them :  and  it  came  between  the  camp  of  the 
Egyptians  and  the  camp  of  Israel ;  and  it  was  a 
cloud  and  darkness  to  them,  but  it  gave  light  by 
night  to  these :  so  that  the  one  came  not  near  the 
other  all  the  night"  (Ex.  xiv.  19,  20).  Thus  the 
pillar  of  the  cloud  was  a  terror  to  the  Egyptians 
and  an  illumination  and  protection  to  the  Israel- 
ites, so  that  the}^  passed  over  between  the  divided 
waters  of  the  sea  to  the  opposite  shore  on  dry 
ground.  The  effect  of  this  great  deliverance 
upon  their  minds,  bringing  them  into  subjection 
to  the  leadership  of  Moses,  was  what  the  apostle 
calls  their  baptism :  "  The}^  were  all  baptized 
into  Moses  by  the  cloud  and  by  the  sea." 

The  efforts  to  explain  this  passage  on  the 
theor}'  that  the  word  denotes  some  specific 
modal  act — to  dip,  to  sprinkle,  or  to  pour — have 
not  been  successful.  They  do  not  conform  to  the 
historical  facts  that  pertain  to  this  baptism.     The 


1 56    The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

theory  that  the  word  denotes  a  thorough  change 
of  condition  is  the  one  which  explains  the  facts, 
and  is  sustained  by  them.  The  modal  theory 
does  not  conform  to  the  historical  facts. 

The  advocates  of  each  of  the  three  forms  of  the 
modal  theory  seem  to  think  that  the  word  must 
mean  either  one  or  another  of  these  acts,  to  dip^ 
or  to  sprinkle,  or  to  pour ;  and,  on  this  theory,  the 
enquiry  is,  In  which  of  these  three  acts  does  the 
baptism  consist  ?  Is  it  dipping,  or  pouring,  or 
sprinkling?  R.  S.  Poole,  in  his  article  on  the 
passage  of  the  Red  Sea,  in  Smitii's  "  Dictionary 
of  the  Bible,"  edited  by  H.  B.  Hackett,  Vol.  III. 
p.  2692,  says  :  "  At  the  time  of  the  passage  of  the 
sea  there  was  a  storm  of  rain  w^ith  thunder  and 
lightning  (Ps.  Ixxvii.  15-20).  To  this  St.  Paul 
may  allude  (i  Cor.  x.  2) ;  for  the  idea  of  baptism 
seems  to  involve  either  immersion  or  sprinkling, 
and  the  latter  could  have  here  occurred  ;  the 
reference  is  evidently  to  the  pillar  of  the  cloud." 
Others  also,  as  Fairchild  (p.  27),  Peters  (p.  63), 
Beckwith  (p.  16),  give  the  same  view:  "Water 
was  sprinkled  upon  them  from  the  cloud.  It 
passed  over  them,  and,  in  passing,  rained  upon 
them,  and  thus  baptized  them."  Dr.  Gill,  who 
held  that  the  word  means  to  dip,  says  tliat  the 
cloud,  as  it  passed  from  the  front  to  the  rear  of 


Jczvish  Bapthms  in  the  New  Testament.    1 5  7 

the  camp,  "  let  down  a  plentiful  rain  upon  them, 
whereby  they  were  in  such  a  condition  as  if  they 
had  been  all  over  dipped  in  water"  (Barnes  in 
loco,  p.  196).  Hall  (p.  73)  says :  "  If  there  is 
any  mode  of  baptism  here,  it  is  a  sprinklings  or 
such  ?i  ponring  out  of  water  as  falls  in  drops.  A 
baptism  there  was  ;  an  immersion  there  was  not." 
There  are  two  decisive  objections  to  the  theory 
that  water  was  poured  or  sprinkled  upon  the  Is- 
raelites from  the  cloudy  pillar.  First,  the  pillar 
was  not  a  rain-cloud.  It  was  the  Shekinah,  the 
pillar  of  cloud  by  day  and  of  tire  by  night,  which 
sometimes  stood  above  them,  sometimes  went  be- 
fore them,  sometimes  behind  them,  for  their  guid- 
ance and  protection.  Secondly,  the  pillar  had  al- 
ready passed  over  them  and  taken  its  position  be- 
hind Xh^va  before  they  entered  the  Red  Sea,  and  it 
remained  behind  them  and  between  them  and  the 
Egyptians  during  the  whole  night.  An  appeal  is 
made  to  Ps.  Ixxvii.  17:  "  The  clouds  poured  out 
water."  But  here  it  was  the  clouds,  not  the  pillar 
of  the  cloud  ;  and  the  tempest  was  sent,  not  upon 
the  Israelites,  but  upon  the  Egyptians,  against 
whom  the  "  arrows  " — i.e.,  the  lightnings — were 
shot  from  the  thunder-cloud.  The  Israelites 
were  under  divine  protection.  "  Thou  leadest 
tby  people   like  a  flock   by  the  hand    of   Moses 


1 58    The  Mea7iing  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

and  Aaron  "  (v.  20).  The  expression  in  Judges 
V.  4,  "  The  clouds  also  dropped  water,"  to  which 
Dr.  Peters  refers,  relates  to  the  region  of  Seir 
and  Edom,  a  different  locality.  The  "  plentiful 
rain,"  Ps.  Ixviii.  9,  to  which  he  also  appeals,  was 
at  Sinai. 

Beckwith,  Peters,  and  Fairchild  also  say  that 
the  baptism  "in  the  sea"  was  by  sprinkling. 
The  "  strong  east  wind  "  blew  the  spra}'  from  the 
waters  foaming  around  them,  and  dashed  it  upon 
them.  But  the  record  says  nothing  of  this, 
and  the  wind  was  blowing  the  waters  away  from 
them.  Dr.  Carson  says:  "  It  was  a  real  immer- 
sion. The  sea  stood  on  each  side  of  them,  and 
the  cloud  covered  them"  (p.  119).  When  re- 
minded that  the  Israelites  went  through  on  dry 
ground  he  replies :  "  They  got  a  dry  dip  "  (p.  413). 
But  the  Israelites  were  not  covered  by  the  cloud 
when  they  passed  through  the  sea.  It  had  gone 
behind  them  before  they  commenced  their  march, 
an-d  remained  behind  them  all  the  night.  Thei-e 
was  nothing  above  them  but  the  open  sky.  This, 
iact,  that  before  they  started  on  their  nightly 
march,  and  during  the  whole  night,  the  pillar  of 
the  cloud  was  behind  them,  and  not  over  them,  is 
fatal  to  the  modal  theory  in  every  form.  It  un- 
roofs Dr.  Carson's  nicely-constructed  baptistery. 


yeiuish  Baptisms  in  the  New  Testament.   159 

which  at  best  was  but  a  tunnel  open  at  both  ends, 
and  leaves  nothing  but  the  march  of  the  people  in 
open  space  over  dry  ground.  The  only  "  action  " 
was  the  tramp,  tramp,  tramp  of  the  moving  hosts. 
The  idea  of  immersion,  and  of  sprinkling  by  the 
dashing  of  the  spray,  is  eacli  a  mere  fancy. 
There  were  two  millions  of  men,  women,  and 
children,  with  all  their  flocks,  and  herds,  and 
tents,  and  household  goods.  Even  in  the  com- 
pact form  of  Robinson  (''  Biblical  Researches," 
Vol.  I.  p.  84),  in  columns  of  a  thousand  persons 
abreast  and  two  thousand  in  depth,  the  body 
must  have  been  half  a  mile  in  breadth  and  not 
less  than  two  miles  in  extent,  occupying  at  least 
four  hours  in  the  passage.  The  larger  estimate 
is  more  probable,  that  they  spread  out  a  mile  in 
wid'Ji  and  live  miles  in  depth.  Any  estimate  is 
fatal  to  the  dipping  theor}^  and  to  the  theory 
that  the  spray  of  the  sea  was  sprinkled  over  all 
that  vast  host  of  people.  The  "  dry  dip  "  of  Dr. 
Carson  is  the  culmination  of  the  fancies  of  the 
rnodal  theory. 

Dr.  Carson  further  says  that  the  baptism  "  re- 
5»embled  the  baptism  of  believers,"  and  "served  a 
like  purpose  as  attesting  their  faith  in  IMoses  as 
a  temporal  saviour."  But  this  statement  is  in 
direct  opposition  to  the  historical  fact  as  related 


1 60    TJie  Rleanijig  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

by  Moses.  The  passing  through  the  sea  was  not 
appointed  for  the  purpose  of  attesting  their  faith 
in  iNIoses,  but  for  the  ver}'-  opposite  purpose  oi  in- 
ducing faith  in  Moses.  Before  the  passage,  they 
were  sadly  lacking  in  faith  and  were  ahnost  in 
despair.  Their  safe  passage,  secured  by  such 
remarkable  instrumentalities  as  the  pillar  of  the 
cloud  and  the  divided  waters  of  the  sea,  was  the 
cause  by  which  their  unbelief  was  removed  and 
their  faith  in  Moses  established. 

One  thing  by  which  Dr.  Carson  and  others 
have  been  misled  is  the  failure  to  consider  the 
chronological  order  of  the  events.  Paul  enume- 
rates five  of  the  events  in  the  order  of  their  oc- 
currence. First,  "  All  our  fathers  were  under 
the  cloud."  This  was  before  they  entered  the 
Red  Sea  (Ex.  xiv.  19,  20).  After  that,  Moses 
stretched  out  his  hand  over  the  sea  and  the 
waters  were  divided,  and  then,  in  the  words  of 
Paul,  they  "  all  passed  through  the  sea."  But 
before  they  started  the  cloud  had  passed  to  their 
rear,  and  remained  there  to  protect  them  from- 
the  Egyptians  while  on  the  passage.  As  the  re- 
sidt  of  their  passage  through  the  sea.  tliey  "  were 
all  baptized  into  Moses  by  the  cloud  and  by  the 
sea."  The  effect  of  their  safe  passage  was  to  pro- 
duce confidence  in  Moses,  and  devotion   to   him 


jrewisk  Baptisms  in  the  New  Testament.    i6i 

as  their  leader.  The  next  event  in  order  which 
Paul  enumeraies  is  the  gift  of  the  manna  for  food 
ill  the  wilderness  :  "  And  did  all  eat  of  the  same 
spiritual  meat."  The  event  next  mentioned  was 
still  later  in  the  order  of  time :  "  And  did  all 
drink  of  that  same  spiritual  drink  :  for  they  drank 
of  that  spiritual  Rock  that  followed  them  :  and 
that  Rock  was  Christ."  These  events  are  nar- 
rated in  the  order  of  time.  If  the  theorists  had 
noticed  the  chronological  order  of  the  events, 
they  would  not  have  placed  the  cloudy  pillar  over 
the  people  as  a  covering  while  on  the  passage 
through  the  sea,  when  it  was  beJiind  t\\Q.\^  to  pro- 
tect them  from  the  Egyptians. 

There  was  no  immersion  of  the  Israelites.  The 
Egyptians  were  immersed,  and,  if  their  immersion 
be  called  a  baptism,  it  was  a  destructive  baptism. 
By  the  cloud  they  were  baptized  into  terror,  and 
by  the  sea  they  were  baptized  into  destruction. 
But  the  Israelites  were  baptized  into  Moses  by 
the  safe  passage  of  the  sea,  as  they  "  went  over 
dr}'  shod."  Thus  "  they  were  all  baptized  into 
Moses  by  the  cloud  and  b}'  the  sea." 

The  English  Version  translates  "  in  the  cloud 
and  in  the  sea."  But  the  translation  "  by  the 
cloud  and  by  the  sea,"  as  Dale  renders  it,  is  the 
true  one.     It  is  supported,  first,  by  the  fact  that 


I  (i2    The  Meanino^  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

the  cloud  and  sea  were  instrumental  ag-encies  in 
securing-  the  safe  passage  of  the  Israelites  ;  second- 
ly, by  the  fact  that  the  cloud  and  the  sea  were  not 
the  elements  into  which  they  were  baptized,  but 
they  were  baptized  into  Moses ;  thirdly,  the  trans- 
lation "in  the  cloud  "  does  not  convey  tiie  mean- 
ing of  the  apostle;  he   does  not  mean   to   locate 
them    in    the    cloud;    they  were    not    enveloped 
in  the  cloud ;  the  cloud   never    did    envelop   the 
people,  but  it  always  either  stood  above  them  or 
went  before   them   or  behind   them  ;    they    were 
not  immersed   in  the    cloud,  nor  were    they  im- 
mersed  in  the  sea,  but    the    cloud   and  sea  w^ere 
the  instrumentalities   by   which  their  safet}^   was 
secured  ;  fourthly,  the    Greek  preposition  is  fre- 
quently used  in  the  New  Testament  to  denote  in- 
strumentality, and  is   often  translated    b}^  words 
that   signify  instrumentality;  fifthly,  the  preposi- 
tion is  translated  "by"  in  passages  that  refer  di- 
rectly   to   the    pillar   of  the    cloud,  as    in  Nehe- 
niiah  ix.  12:  "Thou  leddest  them  in  the  day  by  7i 
cloudy  pillar,  and  in  the  night  by  a  pillar  of  lire"  ;• 
Ps.    Ixxviii.    14:  "In    the    daytime,    also,    he    led 
them  ^vith  a  cloud,  and  all  the  night  zvith  a  light 
of  lire  "  ;  also  in  Ps.  Ixxvii.  20:  "  Thou  leddest  thy 
people    like   a   flock   by  the  hand    of  Moses  and 
Aaron." 


yciuish  }3aptisms  in  the  Neiv  Testament.    163 

In  the  same  way  tlie  Patrists  understand  and 
represent   this    baptism    ("Jud.    Bap.,"    pp.    292, 

304). 

Hilary  says:  "  Per  mare  et  per  nubem  purifi- 
cati  " — They  were  purified  (baptized)  ^/ tlie  cloud 
and  by  the  sea. 

John  of  Damascus  calls  it,  "  That  baptism 
which  is  by  (dia)  the  cloud  and  the  sea." 

Basil,  in  direct  terms,  says :  "  But  the  sea  and 
the  cloud,  at  that  time,  induced  faith  through 
amazement;  but,  as  a  type,  it  signified,  for  the 
future,  the  grace  that  should  be  after." 

Thus  Basil  ascribes  to  the  cloud  and  the  sea 
the  instrumental  agency  of  producing  faith  in 
the  people. 

Didymus  Alexandrinus  :  "The  waters,  securing 
safet}^  for  the  people,  signify  baptism." 

It  was  by  the  instrumentality  of  the  waters  in 
"securing  safety  for  the  people"  that  they  signif)'- 
baptism. 

Didymus  also  says:  "The  whole  material  of 
their  journe}'  from  Egypt  was  a  type  of  the  sal- 
vation by,  baptism." 

Baptism,  as  he  represents  its  type,  has  nothing 
in  it  of  modal  action,  but  was  the  permanent  con- 
dition of  the  people. 


164     The  Meaiii>2g  and  Powej-  of  Baptism. 

DAILY    BAPTISM    BEFORE    MEALS, 
Luke  xi.  37,  38:  "And   as   he  spake,  a  certain 
Pharisee   besought   him  to   dine    with    him  :   and 
he  went  in,  and  sat  down  to  meat. 

"And  when  the  Pliarisee  saw  it,  he  marvelled 
that  he  was  not  first  baptized  before  dinner." 

The  word  baptized,  as  here  used  by  Luke,  was 
so  well  iniderstood  by  his  readers  that  they  need- 
ed no  explanation  of  its  meaning.  It  related  to 
a  practice  of  constant,  daily  occurrence.  It  was 
not  a  mere  physical  washing,  but  a  customary 
ritual  cleansing  which  the  Jews  observed  at  the 
time  of  their  daily  meals.  What  this  custom  was 
we  learn  in  Mark  vii.  3:  "The  Pharisees,  and  all 
the  Jews,  except  the}-  wash  their  hands  oft,  eat 
not";  and  in  Matt.  xv.  2:  "  Thy  disciples  .  .  . 
wash  not  their  hands  when  they  eat  bread."  The 
time  in  the  last  two  passages  was  a  io-w  months 
later,  but  the  custom  referred  to  is  the  same  as 
in  Luke — the  customary  ablution  at  meals.  This 
baptism  before  eating  was  not  enjoined  in  the  law 
of  Moses,  but  in  the  tradition  of  the  elders;  and 
it  was  omitted  by  Jesus  on  this  occasion,  and  by 
his  disciples  on  the  subsequent  occasion.  "  Why 
do  thy  disciples  transgress  the  tradition  of  the 
elders?  for  they  wash  not  their  hands  when  they 
eat  bread." 


yeivish  Baptisms  in  the  New  Testament.    1 65 

The  ablution  was  pertormed  by  washing  t.he 
hands.  The  Pharisee  noticed  the  neglect  of  this 
customary  baptism  on  the  part  of  Jesus,  and  mani- 
fested his  surprise  at  tiie  omission.  This  gave 
occasion  for  the  reproof  which  Jesus  adminis- 
tered to  him  for  such  an  observance  of  a  mere 
external  ceremony,  and  for  his  neglect  of  internal 
purity.  "  Ye  Pharisees  make  clean  the  outside, 
.  .  .  but  your  inward  part  is  full  of  .  .  . 
wickedness." 

Theophylact,  in  his  comment  on  this  passage, 
says  of  Jesus  :  "  Deriding  their  foolish  custom — 
I  mean  their  purifying  themselves  before  eating — 
he  teaches  that  they  ought  to  purify  their  souls 
by  good  works.  For  washing  the  hands  purifies 
the  body  only,  not  the  soul  "  ("  Johannic  Bap- 
tism," p.  117). 

Robinson,  in  his  "  New  Testament  Lexicon," 
article  "  Baptizo,"  gives  four  reasons  in  proof  that 
the  word  in  Hellenistic  usage  expressed  "the 
more  general  idea  of  ablution  or  affusion."  The 
first  of  these  reasons  is  drawn  from  this  Jewish 
baptism  thus  :  "  This  appears  from  the  following 
consideration:  {a)  The  circumstances  narrated  in 
Luke  xi.  38,  compared  with  those  in  Mark  vii.  2-4, 
where  nipto  is  employed,  implying,  according  to 
Oriental  custom,  "a.  pouring  of  water  on  the  hands." 


1 66    The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

The  word  nipto,  which  Mark  uses  to  describe 
this  rite,  is  nlso  used  by  Theophylact  in  his  com- 
ment on  the  b.iptism  in  Luke  xi.  38,  and  its  mean- 
ing is,  "  to  wash,  but  only  some  part  of  the  body, 
as  the  face,  hands,  feet"  (Rob.  *'Lex.") 

Alford  says :  "  This  use  of  the  word  shows 
that  it  did  not  imply  necessarily  the  immersion  of  t lie 
whole  body ;  for  it  was  only  the  hands  which  the 
Pharisees  washed  before  meat." 

BAPTISM   FROM   THE   MARKET. 

Mark  vii.  4:  ''And  except  they  baptize  them, 
selves  from  the  market,  they  eat  not." 

This  is  a  literal  translation  by  Dr.  Dale,  who 
compares  it  with  similar  forms  of  expression  in 
Sirach,  Clement,  Justin  Martyr,  and  in  the  New 
Testament,  deducing,  by  a  clear  and  critical  ex- 
position, the  meaning,  "purify  themselves  from 
the  market."  The  ceremonial  defilement  which 
the  Jews  contracted  in  the  market  the}^  removed 
before  eating  by  the  customar}^  ablution.  The 
previous  verses  show  that  this  was  done  by  wash- 
ing the  hands.  If  we  take  only  the  New  Testa- 
ment and  its  surroundings,  the  nature  of  this  bap- 
tism is  sufficientlj'  plain.  It  was  a  ceremonial 
purification  by  washing  the  hands. 

But  Dr.  Carson  says:    "  It  ought  to  have  been 


Jewish  Baptisms  in  the  Nezv  Testament.    167 

translated,  'Except  they  dip  themselves,  they  eat 
not'"  ("Baptism,"  p.  68).  His  argument  is  that 
"the  word  signifies  I0  <•///>,  and  only /^  dip'''  (p. 
67),  and  therefore  it  "must"  have  that  meaning 
here.  On  p.  452  he  says:  "I  have  found  that 
baplizo  in  other  instances  signifies  to  iunncrse  "  / 
and  he  argues:  "  There  is  a  certainty  that  it  has 
this  meaning  here,  except  it  is  proved  that  it  has 
another  signification  somewhere  else."  But  what 
if  it  be  proved  that  it  has  another  signification 
somewhere  else?  "If  another  signification  is 
found,  I  will  not  insist  that  immersion  must  of 
course  be  the  signification  here."  Now,  it  Jias  been 
proved  from  passages  without  number  that  the 
word  has  another  and  a  ver}-  different  meaning. 
It  has  the  secondary  meaning  to  purify.  This 
completely  reverses  the  argument  as  urged  by 
Dr.  Carson.  As  Dale  would  say  :  "  It  is  in  proof 
that  the  word  has  the  secondary  signification  to 
cleanse  "  in  religious  Usage ;  it  therefore  has  this 
signification  here.  Dr.  Dale  wields  this  argu- 
ment in  "  Johannic  Baptism  "  u'ith  convincing 
force.  It  is  not  needful  here  to  amplify  this  ar- 
gument. 

The  general  prevalence  of  the  custom  of  wash- 
ing the  hands  for  ceremonial  purification  confinns 
the  interpretation  of  this  hand-washing  baptism. 


1 68    llie  Meaning  and  Poiccr  of  Baptism, 

1.  Ceremonial  purirication  by  washing  the 
hands  was  an  Oriental  custom  from  generation  to 
generation.  Dr.  William  Smith,  in  his  "  Diction- 
arj'  of  Christian  Antiquities,"  Vol.  I.,  article 
"  Hands,  washing  of,"  gives  numerous  exam- 
ples from  the  Old  Testament,  from  Hesiod  and 
other  classic  writers,  from  Tertullian,  Chrysostom, 
Cyril,  and  other  Patristic  writers,  in  illustration 
of  this  custom. 

II.  One  of  the  most  frequent  methods  of  this 
ceremonial  purification  was  hy  pouring  Wcit^v  on 
the  hands. 

1.  Robinson,  "  N.  T.  Lex.,"  p.  481.  says:  "The 
usual  mode  of  ablution  in  the  East  is  b}^  pouring 
water  upon  the  hands;  this  is  done  by  a  ser- 
vant " 

2.  In  2  Kings  iii.  ii  :  "  Here  is  Elisha  the  son 
of  Shaphat,  which  poured  water  on  the  hands  of 
Elijah." 

3.  When  Dr.  E.  Robinson  was  in  Hebron,  Pales- 
tine, in  May,  1838,  in  a  house  where  ten  persons 
dined  "  in  the  true  Oriental  style,"  as  he  relates 
in  his  "  Biblical  Researches,"  Vol.  II.  p.  451,  one 
of  the  persons  "  went  and  washed  his  hands  by 
having  water  poured  upon  them  in  an  adjacent 
room."  Another  "did  not  leave  his  place  to 
wash,  but  had  the  water  brought  to  him  where 


ycwish  Baptisms  iti  the  New  Tesiaintnt.    169 

he  sat.*'  Ill  June,  when  Dr.  Robinson  and  Rev. 
Eii  Smith  were  at  Rair.leh,  they  accepted  the 
proposal  of  their  host  "  that  a  servant  should 
wash  our  feet."  The  servant  "  brought  water, 
which  she  poured  upon  our  feet  over  a  large, 
shallow  basin  of  tinned  copper;  kneeling  before 
us,  and  rubbing  our  feet  with  her  hands,  and  wip- 
ing them  with  a  napkin"  (Vol.  III.  p.  26). 

4.  Dr.  Thompson,  describing  an  Oriental  meal, 
says:  "Their  pitcher  and  ewer  are  always 
brought,  and  the  servant,  with  a  napkin  over  his 
shoulder,  pours  water  on  your  hands." 

5.  Hilary,  A.D.  354,  intimates  of  one  place  where 
they  did  not  "  pour  water  on  the  priest's  hands, 
as  we  see  in  all  the  churches  "  ("  Die.  Christ. 
Ant.,"  Vol.  I.  p.  759). 

6.  Rabbi  Akiba,  when  the  water  which  the 
jailer  brought  to  him  in  prison  was  not  enough  to 
drink,  said  :  "  Pour  the  water  on  my  hands;  it  is 
better  to  die  with  thirst  than  transgress  the  tra- 
dition of  the  elders  "  (Poole's  "  Synopsis,"  Fair- 
child,  p.  20;  Dale,  p.  104). 

III.  The  ceremonial  purification  of  the  person 
by  washing  the  hands  is  called  baptisiB  by  the 
Patrists. 

Ambrose,  in  his  comment  on  the  passage  in 
Mark  vii.   2-4,   says:    "The   Jews,   in    following 


I  70     The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

the  tradition  of  ineo,  neglect  that  of  God  ;  thr 
disciples,  in  giving  precedence  to  that  of  God, 
neglected  that  of  men,  so  that  they  would  not 
wash  their  hands  when  thev  ate  bread— since  '  he 
who  is  completely  washed  has  no  need  that  he 
should  wash  his  hands'  (John  xiii.  10).  Jesus  had 
washed  them  :  they  sought  no  other  baptism  ;  for 
Christ  by  one  baptism  resolves  all  baptisms  " 
("  Johannic  Baptism,"  p.  102). 

They  did  not  need  that  other  baptism  by  wash- 
ing the  hands,  for  the  one  perfect  baptism  wdiich 
they  had  received  from  Christ  was  sufficient. 

Clement  of  Alexandria,  quoting  the  hand-wasli- 
ing  of  Telemachus  as  a  baptism,  says:  "This 
[hand-washing  baptism]  was  a  custom  of  the 
Jews,  so  as  even  to  be  baptized  frequently  upon 
the  couch  "  (p.  103). 

The  couch  upon  which  Clement  says  the  Jews 
were  frequently  baptized  according  to  custom, 
was  the  couch  on  which  they  reclined  at  meals. 

Theophylact  also  calls  the  washing  of  the 
hands  a  baptism  (p.   117). 

IV.  The  Jews  had  in  their  houses  the  means  of 
ceremonial  purification.  "  And  there  were  set 
there  six  ivater-pots  of  stone,  after  the  manner  of 
the  purifying  of  the  Jczvs,  containing  two  or  three 
firkins   apiece"    (John    ii.  6).      A   log   containing 


Jcwisk  Baptisms  in  the  New  Testament,   1 7 1 

less  than  one  gallon  was  a  sufficient  quantity, 
according  to  tlie  Jewish  estimate,  for  the  legal 
purification  of  a  single  person.  Even  a  quarter 
of  a  log  was  sufficient  to  wash  the  hands  of  one 
or  two  persons  (Smith's  "  Die.  of  the  Bible,'  Vol. 
IV.  p.  3507  ;  Lightloot,  in  Dale,  p.  104). 

BAPTISM   OF   COUCHES. 

Mai^  vii.  4:  "  And  there  are  many  other  things 
r     which    they  have    received   to  hold — the   baptiz- 
ings  of  cups,  and   pots,  and   brazen   vessels,  and 
couches." 

The  couches  which  the  Jews  baptized  were 
the  table  couches,  on  which  they  reclined  at 
meals.  The  great  size  of  these  dining  couches, 
on  a  single  one  of  which  several  persons  could 
recline,  puts  the  dipping  theory  of  Dr.  Carson  to 
a  severe  strain.  Yet  he  says:  "Though  it  were 
proved  that  the  couches  COULD  NOT  BE  immersed, 
I  would  not  yield  an  inch  of  the  ground  I  have 
occupied  "  (Carson  on  "  Baptism,"  p.  76).  Among 
the  suggestions  he  makes  to  escape  the  difficult)'', 
he  thinks  it  possible  that  the  beds  which  the 
Pharisees  baptized  were  "  the  beds  on  which  they 
slept."  But  the  baptism  of  the  couches  is  men- 
tioned in  connection  with  their  meals,  and  the 
word  has  its  usual  sisrnific.-tion  of  a  dim  er  couch. 


172     The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

But  the  doctor  says:  "Whatever  might  have 
been  their  size,  they  might  easily  be  immersed  in 
a  pond.  ...  I  have  contrived  to  take  them 
to  pieces  "  (p.  400).  So  we  might  take  a  house  to 
pieces,  and  dip  it,  piece  by  piece.  But  such  airy 
fancies  arc  not  worth  the  chase.  The  fact  that 
the  word  "has  been  proved"  to  have  a  secon- 
dary^ meaning  takes  it  wholly  out  of  the  region 
of  fanciful  possibihties,  and  places  it  on  historic 
ground.  The  only  method  of  purifying  house- 
hold goods  spoken  of  in  the  Old  Testament  is  by 
sprinkling — Num.  xix.  18:  "A  clean  person  shall 
take  hyssop,  and  dip  it  in  the  water,  and  sprinkle  it 
upon  the  tent,  and  upon  all  the  vessels  " ;  and 
although  the  dinner  couch  is  not  specified,  and 
therefore  cannot  be  proved  to  be  included  among 
the  vessels,  yet  it  is  one  of  the  articles  of  domes- 
tic furniture,  and  belongs  to  a  class  that  were 
purified  by  sprinkling.  We  are  sometimes  re- 
ferred to  Num.  xxxi.  23.  But  this  relates  to  an 
ordinance  of  war  concerning  articles  obtained 
from  foreign  sources,  which,  from  their  pre-emi- 
nent uncleanness,  required  an  unusual  purifica- 
tion. This  is  the  only  instance  in  the  Bible  where 
even  material  objects  were  required  to  be  purified 
by  immersion.  This  was  never  the  ordinary 
mode    of  purification.     "  Sprinkling,"  says  Proi. 


Jewish  Baptisms  in  the  New  Testament.   1 73 

Stuart,  "  was  used  most  frequently  of  all  by  way 
of  purification"  ("Bib.  Rep,,"  Vol.  III.  p.  339). 
Alford  says:  "These  baptisms  as  applied  to 
n\ivQov  [meaning-  probably  here  couches  (trich- 
nia)  used  at  meals]  were  certainly  not  immersions, 
but  sprinklings,  or  affusions  of  water." 

HEB.  IX.   10:    "DIVERSE   BAPTISMS." 

The  word  "  washings,"  by  which  the  Greek 
word  baptisms  is  translated  in  the  English  Ver- 
sion, expresses  the  true  meaning;  for  these  bap- 
tisms were  cleajisings,  washings,  purifications.  But 
this  version  does  not  apprise  the  English  reader 
that  those  washings  are  baptisms.  If  the  word 
had  been  translated  baptisms,  it  would  have  di- 
rected the  attention  of  the  reader  of  the  English 
Version  to  the  baptisms  of  the  Old  Testament. 

The  apostle  teaches  that  there  is  a  diversity  of 
these  baptisms.  He  also  speaks  of  baptisms  in 
the  plural  in  Ileb.  vi.  i  :  "  The  doctrine  of  bap- 
tisms"; but  he  does  not  there  refer  to  Judaic 
baptisms,  as  he  does  in  Heb.  ix.  10.  These  bap- 
tisms are  diverse  in  their  nature',  in  the  agencies 
by  which  they  are  effected,  and  in  the  mode  of 
accomplishment.  There  were  various  baptismal 
agencies,  such  as  sacrificial  blood,  heifer-ashes, 
and  water,  and  these  diverse  agencies  had  a  di 


1 74    The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

verse  power,  and,  in  their  operation,  induced  di- 
vei'se  conditions — i.e.,  diverse  baptisms. 

The  Patrists  often  speak  of  a  diversity  of  bap- 
tisms. Hilar3^says:  "  Baptismata  sunt  diversa," 
under  which  heading  he  speaks  of  the  baptism  of 
John,  the  second  baptism  of  Christ,  the  baptism 
of  the  Spirit,  the  baptism  of  fire,  of  judgment, 
and  the  baptism  of  martyrdom.  Thus  diverse, 
botli  in  their  agencies  and  modes  of  operation, 
are  the  baptisms  of  which  he  makes  enumeration. 
Ambrose  describes  six  kinds  of  baptisms.  He 
sa3-s  :  "  Multa  sunt  genera  baptismatum  " — There 
are  many  kinds  of  baptisms ;  "  Plurima  baptisma- 
tum genera  " — Very  many  kinds  of  baptisms.  Tlie 
theory  that  there  is- only  one  baptism — viz.,  a  spe- 
cific act,  to  dip — is  an  invention  of  later  times. 

Basil  says:  "  We  should  learn,  in  brief,  the  di- 
versity between  the  baphsm  of  iSIoscs  and  that 
of  John." 

Chrysostom  says:  "John  exhorted  the  Jews 
not  to  cherish  hopes  of  salvation  through  diverse 
baptisms  and  purifications  of  waters." 

Justin  Martyr  sa3's :  "The  law  released  from 
blame,  daily,  transgressors  by  certain  sprinklings 
.  .  .  and  diverse  kinds  of  baptisms,  but  grace 
grants  only  one  baptism." 

Gregor}'    Nazianzen :    "Come,    let    us    enquire 


yeTvish  Baptis7??s  in  tin:  Nciv  Tesfamcni.    175 

someLliing  concerning  the  difference  of  baptisms, 
that  we  may  go  hence  purified."  lie  enumerates 
and  describes  six  different  baptisms  (''Jud.  Bap.," 
p.  3£o). 

The  baptisms  of  the  Old  Testament  of  which 
Paul  speaks  included  the  purifications  by  sprin- 
kling the  blood  of  bulls  and  goats  and  the  ashes 
of  a  heifer.  He  specifies  these  on  account  of 
their  emblematic  nature.  He  is  making  a  com- 
parison between  the  ^losaic  and  the  Christian 
dispensations,  and  especially  between  the  puri- 
fications of  the  Jewish  iitu;il  and  the  great  puri- 
fication which  Jesus  Christ  made  for  men  by  his 
death  on  the  cross,  t)f  whicii  those  Jewish  bap- 
tisms were  a  type. 

The  "  diverse  baptisms  "  include  the  purifica- 
tions by  sprinkling  the  sacrificial  blood  and  heifer- 
ashes  mentioned  in  v.  13.  The  "carnal  ordinan- 
ces "  in  V.  10  consist  of  the  "  meats  and  drinks 
and  diverse  baptisms  "  ;  and  as  those  purifications 
are  not  found  in  the  "  meats  and  drinks,"  they 
must  be  included  in  the  "  baptisms." 

I.  The  word  "  and  "  before  "  carnal  ordinan-^ 
ces  "  in  the  English  Version  is  not  in  the  origi- 
nal. It  is  not  in  the  Greek  text  of  Robinson's 
edition  of  the  New  Testament  by  Augustus 
Hahn,    1842,    nor   in    that   of  Tischendorf;    1873. 


1 76    The  Mea7iing  and  Power  of  Baptisfu. 

Both  editions  note  it  as  a  variation,  but  i-ejcct  it 
from  the  genuine  text.  It  is  not  even  recognized 
b}'  Stuart,  Winer,  and  other  scholars. 

2.  Consequently,  the  word  "  ordinances  "  is  in 
apposition  with  "  meats  and  drinks  and  diverse 
baptisms,"  explanatory  of  them,  and  therefore  in- 
cludes  them.     Stuart  shows  this  in  his  transla- 
tion :    "  Meats  and  drinks  and  diverse   washings — 
ordinances  pertainitig  to  the  flesh  "  ("  Commentary," 
p.  431).  Winer  also,  in  his  "  New  Testament  Gram- 
mar," p.  635,  says  that  the  word  "  ordinances  is  in 
apposition  to  meats  and  drinks  and   diverse  bap- 
tisms." In  another  i-emark  he  calls  it "  that  apposi- 
tive  word."    Prof  Stuart  says :  "  Meats  and  drinks 
and    diverse  baptisms   I   understand  as  a  cLiuse 
qualifying  ordinances— /.r.,  these  words  stand  in 
the   place  of  an   adjective   designating    wherein 
the   ordinances  consisted."     Prof.  Wilson    says: 
•'  The  term  '  carnal  ordinances '  does  not  express 
something  additional  to  the  meats  and  drinks  and 
baptizings,  but  is  another  name  for  the  same  ritual 
observances"  ("  C.  and  P.  B.,"  p.  332).     Dr.  Dale 
says  :    "  That   '  the    diverse    baptizings  '   are   in- 
cluded   in    the   *  carnal   ordinances '    (ordinances 
of    the  flesh)   is  a   matter  of  universal   acknow- 
ledgment"("  Jud.   Bap.,"  p.  385). 

3.    The    description   which    Paul  gives  of    the 


yeivish  Baptisms  in  the  New  Testament.   177 

ritual  efficacy  of  "the.  blood  of  bulls  and  of 
goats,  and  the  ashes  of  a  heifer" — an  efficacy 
which  merely  consists  in  "purifying  the  flesh  " — 
places  them  among  the  ordinances  of  the  flesh; 
and  as  they  do  not  belong  to  the  "  meats  and 
drinks,"  they  must  be  found  in  the  "  diverse  bap- 
tisms." They  are  called  "  ordinances  of  the 
flesh  "  because  tliey  only  sanctify  "  to  the  puri- 
fying of  tlie  flesh,"  as  the  Patrists  say,  "  having 
power,  for  the  time,  for  the  purification  of  the 
body."  They  are  external,  ceremonial  ordi- 
nances, ritual  purifications,  t3pical  of  the  greater 
purification  by  the  sprinkling  of  the  blood  of 
Christ.  "For  if  the  blood  of  bulls  and  of 
goats,  and  the  ashes  of  an  heifer,  sprinkling 
the  unclean,  sanctifieth  to  the- purifying  of  the 
flesh,  how  much  more  shall  the  blood  of  Christ, 
who  through  the  Eternal  Spirit  offered  himself 
without  spot  to  God,  purge  your  conscience  from 
dead  works  to  serve  the  living  God  ?  " 

In  full  harmony  with  this  doctrine  of  the 
apostle  is  the  testimon)^  of  the  Patrists. 

Ambrose  says :  "  He  who  wished  to  be  cleansed 
by  typical  baptism  was  sprinkled  with  the  blood 
of  the  lamb  by  a  bunch  of  hyssop  "  ("  C.  and  P. 

B.,"  p.  534). 

Hilary  :     "  But    sprinkling    according    to    the 


1 7  8    The  Me  a  ?i  ing  a  nd  Po  we  r  of  Baptism . 

Law  is  the  cleansing  from  sin  through  faith 
purif3'ing  the  people  by  the  sprinkling  of  blood 
(Ps.  1.  9) — a  sacrament  of  the  future  sprinkling 
of  the  blood  of  the  Lord  "  ("  The  Cup  and  the 
Cross,"  p.  34). 

Ambrose:  "For  he  who  is  baptized,  whether 
according  to  the  Law  or  according  to  the  Gospel, 
is  cleansed  :  according  to  the  Law,  because  Moses 
sprinkled  the  blood  of  the  lamb  with  a  bunch  of 
hyssop ;  according  to  the  Gospel,  because  the 
garments  of  Christ  were  \yhite  as  snow  "  (p.  34). 
The  ashes  of  a  blood-red  heifer  Paul  also  repre- 
sents as  typical  of  the  blood  of  Christ.  In  this 
view  the  testimony  of  Moses,  Josephus,  Philo, 
Cj^ril,  and  Gregory  Nazianzen,  to  the  ceremonial 
purification  of  the  unclean  by  sprinkling  the 
ashes  of  a  heifer,  has  great  value.  Gregory  Na- 
zianzen says  :  "  Therefore  let  us  be  baptized,  that 
we  may  overcome ;  let  us  partake  of  the  puri- 
fying waters  .  .  .  more  sanctifjdng  than  the 
ashes  of  a  heifer  sprinkling  the  unclean,  and 
having,  for  the  time,  power  for  the  purification  of 
the  bod}^,  but  not  for  the  complete  removal  of 
sin "  (p.  34).  The  complete  removal  of  sin  is 
effected  only  by  the  blood  of  Christ.  "  The  type- 
baptism  of  Judaism,"  sa3's  Dale,  "contemplates 
the  purification  of  the  body  from  ceremonial  dc- 


JcwisJi  Baptisms  in  the  New  Testament,   i  79 

filement.  This  purification  of  the  body,  as  a 
ceremonial  effect,  was  perfect.  It  was,  therefore, 
well  adapted  to  be  a  type  of  the  purification  of 
the  soul  by  the  blood  of  Christ.  The  blood  of 
bulls  and  goats,  and  the  blood-red  heifer-ashes, 
are  universally  regarded  as  types  of  the  blood 
of  Christ.  .  .  .  We  have  the  clear  and  unanimous 
interpretation  of  these  early  writers  for  the  iden- 
tification of-  Jewish  and  Christian  baptisms,  as 
type  and  antitype  baptism,  as  well  as  the  un- 
erring authority  of  inspiration,  through  Paul,  for 
conjoining  the  diverse  baptizings  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament (especially  its  sprinklings)  with  tliat  one 
wondrous  and  central  baptism  of  the  new  dispen- 
sation— THE  BAPTISM   OF   CaLVARY  "  (p.  32). 


CHAPTER  IX. 

BAPTISM   WITH    WATER. 

John  i.  26:  "I  baptize  with  water." 

"pOUR  centuries  had  passed  since  the  latest  of 
-*-  the  Hebrew  prophets  had  foretold  the  com- 
ing of  Elias.  When  the  people  heard  the  voice 
crying-  in  the  wilderness,  they  knew  that  he  had 
come.  The  whole  Jewish  nation  was  moved  by 
his  ministry.  This  distinguished  preacher  receiv- 
ed a  commission  from  heaven  to  announce  the 
Messiah  and  prepare  the  people  to  receive  him. 
To  give  a  fitting  reception  to  the  coming  One,  a 
great  change  vvas  requisite  in  the  character  of 
the  people.  To  promote  this  preparation  was 
the  mission  of  John  the  Baptist.  A  thorough 
reformation  was  needful,  and  this  was  set  forth 
by  preaching  the  baptism  of  repentance  into  the 
remission  of  sins.  This  repentance-baptism  was- 
symbolized  by  an  external  rite— the  baptism  with 
water. 

Pure    water   is   the   natural    symbol   of    moral 
purification.     In  all  nations  and  in  all  ages  it  is 

180 


Baptism  with  Water.  i8l 

the  prima  agent  for  cleansing,  and  the  first  and 
main  symbol  of  purity.  The  purifying  quality 
of  water  makes  it  a  fit  emblem  of  the  purifica- 
tion of  the  soul  by  the  Spirit  of  God.  Baptism 
is  twofold,  spiritual  and  ritual ;  the  one  real  in 
the  soul,  the  other  an  emblem,  a  shadow  of  the 
real.  The  baptism  of  John  partook  of  this  two- 
fold nature.  The  baptism  which  he  preached 
was  the  baptism  of  repentance  into  the  forgive- 
ness of  sins,  a  spiritual  change  in  the  condition 
of  the  soul ;  the  baptism  which  he  administered 
was  a  baptism  with  water,  emblematical  of  the 
baptism  of  repentance.  The  baptism  of  repent- 
ance was  a  change  in  the  character  and  spiritual 
condition  of  the  people,  and  this  inward  change 
was  S3'mbolized  by  an  external  rite  administered 
to  those  who  had  become  subjects  of  the  spiritual 
change. 

This  twofold  baptism  of  John  in  its  purifying 
nature  was  understood  and  described  by  Jose- 
phus :  "  For  Herod  slew  him  [John  the  Baptist], 
a  good  man,  exhorting  the  Jews  to  cultivate  vir- 
tue, and  observing,  uprightness  toward  one  an- 
other and  piety  toward  God,  to  come  for  bap- 
tizing [purification]  ;  for  thus  the  baptizing  would 
appear  acceptable  to  him,  not  using  it  for  the 
remission    of  sins,  but  for   purity    of  the    body 


1 82     The  i\fca?iing  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

provided  tliat  the  soul  has  been  previously 
purg-ed  by  righteousness  "  (■'  Johannic  Baptism," 
p.  125). 

In  this  description  of  John's  baptism  Josephus 
gives  his  knowledge  of  its  nature  and  design, 
and  also  "the  current  popular  understanding" 
respecting  it.  The  soul  must  first  be  purified  by 
righteousness,  and  this  condition  of  the  soul  is 
fitly  represented  by  the  baptism  of  the  bod}' ;  and 
both  the  one  and  the  other  Josephus  describes  as 
a  purification. 

The  secondary  meaning  of  the  Greek  word 
baptizo,  denoting  a  condition  of  purification,  was 
in  daily,  current  use  in  the  time  of  John  the  Bap- 
tist. The  proof  of  this  has  already  been  given, 
and  need  not  be  here  repeated.  The  result  of  an 
exhaustive  investigation  of  the  various  baptisms 
of  Judaism  is  thus  given  in  the  conclusion  of 
Dale's  "Judaic  Baptism,"  p.  400; 

"  Judaic  Baptism  is  a  condition  of  ceremonial 
PURIFICATION  cffixtcdby  ///^WASHING  of  tJie  Jiands 
or  feet,  by  the  SPRINKLING  of  sacrificial  blood  or 
heifer-ashes,  by  the  POURING  tipon  of  zvater,  by  the 
TOUCH  of  a  coal  of  fire,  by  the  WAVING  of  a  flaming 
sivord,  and  by  divers  other  modes  and  agencies,  de- 
pendent in  no  "Jinse  on  any  form  of  act  or  on  the  cover- 
ing of  the  object." 


Baptism  ivith   Water.  183 

During-  the  whole  period  of  the  Hebrew  coin- 
mon wealth,  for  fifteen  hundred  years  from  Moses 
to  John,  those  ritual  purifications  which  the 
Greek-speaking-  Jews  called  baptisms  were  in 
dail}-,  constant  practice.  The  principal  baptismal 
agencies  were  sacrificial  blood,  heifer-ashes,  and 
pure  water;  and  these  baptismal  agencies  were 
usually  applied  by  sprinkling  or  by  pouring  water 
on  the  hands.  With  the  nature  of  these  various  Jew- 
ish baptisms  John  the  Baptist  was  well  acquainted. 
The  secondary  meaning  of  baptizo,  expressive  of 
purification,  was  its  common,  daily  signification  in 
the  popular  language  of  the  Jews,  and  had  been 
for  several  generations.  .  From  the  time-  that 
Jewish  Greek  became  their  vernacular  tongue 
this  word  had  been  applied  to  denote  these 
Hebrew  purifications,  just  as  other  Greek  words 
had  been  appropriated  to  express  their  Hebrew 
ideas.  All  the  surroundings  of  the  son  of  Zacha- 
rias  from  his  childhood  had  been  pervaded  by  the 
atmosphere  of  this  religious  usage.  The  word 
was  prepared  for  his  use  by  its  whole  religious 
history.  The  only  modification  of  its  meaning 
which  was  needed  was  to  turn  it  from  its  cere- 
monial and  typical  application  so  as  to  adapt  it  to 
its  spiritual  and  symbolic  use  in  his  preaching  as 
'I'.e  forerunner  of  Christ.     This  modification  was 


1S4    The  Mea7iing  and  Poivey  of  Baptism. 

both  needful  and  natural  under  the  moulding  in- 
flirence  of  the  new  order  of  thins^s. 

As  the  baptisms  of  Judaism  were  diverse,  so 
the  baptism  of  John  had  its  own  distinctive 
nature,  in  which  it  differed  from  Judaic  baptism. 
Judaic  baptism  puritied  the  body  ceremonially; 
John  s  baptism  was  a  superior  baptism.  It  was 
the  baptism  of  repentance  into  the  remission  of 
sins,  symboHzed  by  a  ritual  baptism  with  pure 
water.  The  ritual  baptism  of  John  was  a  sym- 
bol of  the  baptism  of  the  soul  by  repentance.  The 
generic  idea  common  to  Judaic  and  Johannic  bap- 
tisms was  <?:  ^c;/^///<?;^  of  purification  resulting  from 
some  baptizing  power  capable  of  prodiiciiig  such  a  con- 
dition. Tlie  character  of  the  baptism  in  either 
case  was  determined  by  the  characteristic  of  the 
baptizing-  agency.  It  was  the  characteristic  of 
sacrificial  blood  and  heifer-ashes  to  produce  cere- 
monial purification.  It  was  the  characteristic  of 
pure  water,  in  its  ritual  use  by  John,  to  produce 
symbol  purity,  emblematical  of  the  spiritual 
purity  of  the  soul  resulting  from  the  baptism  of 
repentance.  But  the  essential  idea  common  to 
all  these  baptisms — purification — received  a  more 
elevated  and  spiritual  significance,  and  a  new 
and-fresh  life,  in  the  baptism  of  John. 

As  the    baptism   of  John  was,  in  its  specialty. 


I 


Baptism  with  Water.  185 

different  from  Judaic  baptism,  he  employed  a 
new  word  to  express  it.  The  word  fioi7iriaf.ia, 
the  Greek  noun  which  is  used  to  express  the  bap- 
tism of  John,  appears  for  the  first  time  in  connec- 
tion with  his  ministry.  It  does  not  occur  in  any 
previous  writing.  It  is  worthy  of  special  notice, 
because  it  belongs  to  a  class  of  Greek  words 
which  do  not  express  act,  but  effect,  a  condition  re- 
sulting from  the  action  of  the  verb.  This  princi- 
ple is  well  understood  by  Greek  scholars,  but  its 
importance  and  value  in  relation  to  the  true 
meaning  of  baptism  will  justify  the  citation  of 
some  proof. 

Dr.  Dale,  "Johannic  Baptism,"  p.  141,  says: 
"  Substantives  derived  from  verbs  ending  in  ma 
are  used  to  express  the  effect,  rcsnlt,  product,  state 
induced  by  the  verb.  In  this  view  all  gramma- 
rians concur." 

Crosby,  "  Greek  Grammar,"  sec.  364,  says : 
"  Nouns  foi^med  by  adding  ma  to  the  stem  of  the 
verb  denote  the  effect  or  object  of  the  action." 

Hadle3%  "Greek  Grammar,"  sec.  461,  D,  ^, 
says:  "The  RESULT  of  an  action  is  expressed  by 
the  suffix  ma.'' 

Kiihner  sa3'S :  "Substantives  with  the  ending 
ma  denote  the  effect  or  result  of  the  transitive 
action  of  the  verb." 


1 86    TJie  Meaniup-  and  Poiver  of  Baptism. 

Winer  says  :  "  The  most  numerous  loimations 
are  those  in  via,  .  .  .  mostly  in  the  sense  of 
product  or  state" ;  and  he  gives  this  very  word 
ftanrwfxa  as  the  first  example  ("  N.  T.  Gr.," 
Thayer's  edition,  p.  93). 

Sophocles,  Jelf,  and  Philip  Buttmann  lay  down 
the  same  principle.  Dr.  Dale  has  the  most  solid 
reasons  for  saying:  "  Baptism  {ftaTTTiafia)  denotes 
a  result,  an  effect,  a  condition  Irom  the  act  of  the 
verb.  .  .  .  The  use  of  this  word  originates  in 
the  Scriptures.  It  is  there  used  to  express  ex- 
clusively a  spiritual  result,  effect,  or  condition. 
It  never  has  water  as  its  complement"  ("The 
Cup  and  the  Cross,"  p.  5). 

Baptism  with  water  is  a  symbol  of  the  baptism 
oi  repentance.  It  would  be  an  error  to  interpret 
the  expression,  "  I  baptize  with  water  into  re- 
pentance "  (Matt.  iii.  11),  as  teaching  that  bap- 
tism with  water  is  "•  the  instrumental  cause  "  of 
repentance;  for  water  has  no  power  to  cause 
repentance.  This  interpretation  is  refuted  by 
the  continued  impenitence  of  numbers  after  re- 
ceiving ritual  baptism.  The.  ritual  baptism  is  but 
a  symbol,  an  expressive  symbol,  and  iisefid  as 
s  ich,  but  without  power  to  produce  the  change 
ot  spiritual  condition  which  it  symbolizes.  This 
is  seen   \n   the   contrast   which   John  presents  in 


Baptism  zvith   ]Vate7'.  187 

this  and  parallel  passages  between  baptism  with 
water  and  the  baptism  of  the  H0I3'  Ghost.  John 
reg-arded  the  Pharisees  and  Sadducees  as  unfit 
candidates  for  his  baptism  in  their  impenitent 
condition.  Others,  "  confessing  their  sins,"  he 
baptized.  As  they  had  experienced  the  reality, 
it  was  fit  that  thev  should  receive  the  symbol. 
But  the  external  rite  would  be  vacated  of  its 
meaning  and  become  an  empty  form  to  those 
who  did  not  repent.  He  therefore  said  to  them  : 
"  I  indeed  baptize  you  with  water  into  repent- 
ance" — simple  water,  a  mere  symbol,  having  no 
efficacy  in  itself,  but  expressive  of  the  repentance 
which  is  required — "  but  He  that  cometh  after  me 
is  mightier  than  I.  .  .  .  He  shall  baptize  you 
with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  with  fire."  They  must 
become  subjects  of  the  baptism  of  repentance 
which  John  preached,  and  "bring  forth  fruit 
meet  for  repentance,"  or  baptism  with  water 
would  be  of  no  avail. 

The  emblematical  character  of  John's  baptism 
appears  in  the  answer  which  he  gave  to  a  ques- 
tion i-espccting  the  nature  of  his  baptism.  The 
enquir)-  was  riot,  as  in  the  English  Version,  "  Wh}^ 
bnptizest  thou  ?"  but,  as  it  was  understood  by  the 
Patrists  and  bv  recent  scholars,  "  What  [baptism] 
dost  thou  baptize?"  (Dale,  p.  145).     John  replies: 


1 88    The  Meaning  and  Pozuer  of  Baptism. 

"  1  baptize  with  water,"  a  S3'mbol  baptism. 
There  is  One  coming  who  "shall  baptize  you 
with  the  Holy  Ghost,"  The  baptism  of  the 
Mightier  One  is  the  real  baptism,  of  which  mine 
is  onl}^  an  emblem.  Ambrose,  quoting  John's 
language,  "I  baptize  with  water,"  says:  "For 
the  body  is  purified  by  water;  the  sins  of  the  soul 
are  cleansed  by  the  Holy  Ghost"  (Dale,  p.  14S). 

The  design  of  John's  baptism  inv^olves  its  em- 
blematic character.  Pointing  to  "the  Lamb  of 
God  that  taketh  awa}'  the  sin  of  the  world," 
hesaj's:  "But  that  he  should  be  made  manifest 
to  Israel,  therefore  am  I  come  baptizing  with 
water."  John's  baptism,  both  tiie  spiritual  and 
the  ritual,  had  its  signification  in  its  relation  to 
Him  of  wdiom  John  was  the  forerunner.  "  The 
object  of  the  rite  was  to  direct  the  attention  of 
the  people  not  only  by  words,  but  by  the  addi- 
tional help  of  a  visible  symbol,  to  the  Lamb  of 
God  as  in  Jiimself  most  pure,  as  vindicating  the 
divine  purity  by  his  w^ork,  and  as  demanding  and 
securing  purification  in  all  \\\\o  should  share  in- 
the  fruits  of  that  work.  The  rite  was  designed 
by  the  use  of  symbol  water  to  set  forth  purifi- 
cation FROM  SIN  as  the  great  and  vital  thought 
connected  with  and  effected  by  the  coming  Lamb 
OF  God  "  (p.  229). 


Baptism  wiik  Water.  189 

There  is  a  theorj^  very  different  from  this — a 
theory  which  denies  that  the  word  denotes  purifi- 
cation, and  declares  that  it  signifies  a  dipping 
into  water,  and  that  this  act  of  dipping  into 
water  is  designed  to  set  forth  the  burial  and 
resurrection  of  Christ. 

But  of  baptism  in  any  i-elation  to  the  burial  of 
Christ  there  is  not  a  syllable  in  the  four  Gospels, 
or  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  or  in  any  writer 
for  more  than  a  quarter  of  a  century  after  the 
resurrection  of  Christ.  The  first  allusion  to  it 
is  in  a  metaphorical  passage  in  two  of  Paul's 
Epistles,  which  will  be  considered  in  another 
place. 

But  it  is  said  the  expression  in  the  Greek  is  iv 
vdari — in  water — and  that  this  presents  the  water 
not  as  "  the  means  by  which,"  but  as  "  the  ele- 
ment in  which,"  the  baptism  takes  place.  In 
"  Theodosia  Ernest,"  American  Baptist  Publica- 
tion Society,  p.  88,  we  are  told  :  "  So  you  will  find 
it  in  every  place";  and  on  p.  96  we  are  told 
that  this  is  "  the  rrue  rendering  "  in  Acts  i.  5. 
But  the  Greek  prcpositic^n  docs  not  occur  in 
Acts  i.  5,  and  where  it  does  occur  it  is  used  in 
the  instrumental  sense,  "  with  water,"  as  it  is  cor 
rcctly  translated  in  the  English  Version. 

I.   The  Greek  word  vdaxi  is  used  in  the  dative 


I90   The  Meaning  and  Power  0/  Baptism. 

case  tvitiiont  the  preposition  in  Acts  i.  5,  and  else- 
where in  the  New  Testament,  as  the  instj-iiviental 
means  of  baptism.  In  Acts  i.  5,  where  our  Sa- 
viour says:  "John  truly  baptized  with  water  " — 
a  passage  occupying  a  position  of  special  promi- 
nence in  the  teaching  of  Jesus — the  simple  dative 
is  used  without  the  Greek  preposition.  It  is 
what  the  Greek  grammarians  call  ''the  instru- 
mental dative.'"  Prof.  Hackett  translates  it  "  with 
water,"  and  in  this  case  even  Dr.  Conant  con- 
sents (p.  100).  No  other  translation  is  consistent 
with  usage.  Winer,  in  his  "  New  Testament 
Grammar,"  p.  216,  places  Acts  i.  5,  xi,  16,  with 
other  passages,  under  the  ''  dative  of  the  instni- 
uient  (casus  instrumentalis),"  and  translates 
"  with."  On  p.  412  he  translates  the  expression 
*^  baptize  luith  water.''  The  word  is  used  in  the 
dative  without  the  preposition  to  denote  the 
means  with  which  the  baptism  is  performed  in 
Acts  i.  5,  Acts  xi.  16,  Luke  iii.  16,  and,  in  Tischen- 
dorf's  New  Testament,  in  Mark  i.  8.  These  ex- 
amples are  sufficient  to  establish  the  instrumental, 
signification. 

2.  The  word  is  sometimes  used  in  the  instrn- 
nirnfat  sense  zaith  the  preposition.  It  is  thus  used 
in  Matt.  iii.  ii  ;  John  i.  26,  31,  33;  and.  in  Hahn's 
New  Testament,  in  Mark  i.  8. 


Baptism  with  Water.  191 

The  use  ot  the  preposition  in  the  instniment.il 
sense  is  very  frequent  in  Hellenistic  Greek. 
Alexander  Buttmann,  in  his  "  New  Testament 
Grammar,"  translated  by  J.  H.  Thayer,  1873, 
under  "Dative  of  the  Instrument,"  p.  181,  says: 
"  The  preposition  iv  is  prefixed  to  this  dative  with 
uncommon  frequency"  in  "the  language  of  the 
New  Testament  ";  and  on  p.  329  he  s;iys:  "  Kv  in 
the  Old  and  New  Testaments  is  very  comifionly 
used  ...  to  designate  the  means."'  We  are 
told  in  "  Theodosia  Ernest  "  that  there  are  '■  only 
about  fort}^  places"  in  the  New  Testament  in 
which  the  Greek  preposition  must  be  translated 
'^  with  in  the  sense  of  the  instrument  or  material 
with  which  anything  is  done  "  (p.  89).  But  this, 
like  the  statement  respecting  Acts  i.  5,  must  be 
numbered  among  the  errors  of  that  theological 
romance.  Even  from  the  Baptist  Version  of  the 
Bible,  which  naturally  gives  only  the  minimum 
of  examples.  Dr.  Dale  quotes,  from  the  single 
Gospel  of  Matthew,  thirty-seven  passages  in 
which  that  Version  gives  it  the  instrumental 
sense,  "■re////,"  " /y,"  ''  throughi'  He  also  quotes 
more  than  thirty  examples  from  the  Book  of  Re- 
vek.tion  in  which  the  Baptist  Bible  gives  it  the 
instrumental  sense;  and  in  the  whole  New  Testa 
ment,    from    personal    examination,    he    says    tiie 


T  92     The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

number  "must  be  computed  by  hundreds"  (p. 
171).  Dr.  Dale  also  gives  numerous  quotations 
from  Hellenistic  Greek  writers  in  the  Septuagint 
and  elsewhere  of  the  use  of  the  preposition  in  the 
instrumental  sense.  His  statement,  like  that  of 
Prof.  Buttmann,  rests  upon  the  solid  basis  of  facts 
when  he  says,  p.  213:  *' //"  is  in  proof  ihixt  ev  is 
used  in  the  classics,  and  abundantly  in  the  New 
Testfiment,  in  the  sense  with,  byi"  While,  there- 
fore, the  Greek  preposition  in  the  Septuagint  and 
in  the  New  Testament  often  means  in,  it  also 
with  equal  frequency  denotes  the  instrumental 
means,  and  is  rightly  translated  "  with  "  in  the 
English  Version. 

3.  Aspecialargument  for  the  instrumental  sense 
is  found  in  the  tj-uc  reason  for  the  variable  use  of  the 
two  forms  of  expression  in  the  New  Testament. 
Luke  invariably  omits  the  preposition;  Matthew 
and  John  insert  it.  INIark  omits  it,  according  to 
the  Sinaitic  manuscript  and  Tischendorf's  New 
Testament.  Origen  quotes  both  Mark  and  Luke 
as  omitting  it,  while  he  quotes  Matthew  and' 
John  as  inserting  it  (Dale,  p.  288).  Alford  ac- 
cepts the  reading  of  Tischendorf.  Dr.  Conant 
(p.  100)  acknowledges  "the  instrumental  dative'^ 
in  Luke  iii.  16,  Acts  i.  5.  xi.  16;  vet  he  trans- 
lates  "  in  the  Holy  Spirit,"  in  the  same  passages, 


BaptisDi  with  Water.  193 

•'as  the  element   in    which    the   baptism   is  per- 
formed."     The    reason    which    he   gives    is    that 
"■  the  Holy  Spirit  could  less  properl}'  be- conceiv- 
ed as  the  mere  instrument  of  an  act."     But  this 
reason  is  not  satisfactory.     It  would  require  uni- 
formity in  the  expression  relating  to  water  in  the 
Greek  in  all  the  passages.     It  does  not  account 
for  the  variation  in  the  different  writers.       The 
true  reason  is  given  b}'   Prof.  Buttmann.     Luke 
wrote   more  in  tJie  classic  style,  which   generally 
employs  the  simple  dative  to  denote  instrumen- 
tality.    JMatthew  and  John  wrote  in  conformity 
with    the  idiom  of    the  Hcbretu,   which  very  fre- 
quently employs   the    preposition    in    the  instru- 
mental   sense.       Prof.    Buttmann,    "New    Testa- 
ment    Grammar,"   p.    329,    says:     "The    Greek' 
preposition  4k  in  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  is 
very  commonl}-   used,  like  the  preposition  beth  in 
Hebrew,  to  designate  the  means'' ;    and  on  p.  181 
he  says :  "  This  New  Testament  peculiarity,"  the 
uncommon  frequency  v/ith  which  the  preposition 
hv    is   prefixed    to    the   instrumental    dative,   "  is 
manifestly  a  ]"esult  of  the  frequent  occurrence  of 
the  preposition  in  the  Septuagint,  after   the    ex- 
ample of  the  Hebrew  beth,  as  is  apparent  from 
countless  examples  from  the  Old  Testament  and 
New."     The  same  i)rincjplc  is  given  by   ^Viner, 


194    The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

"  New  Testament  Grammar,"  p.  388.  In  classic 
Greek  instrumental  agency  is  expressed  by  the 
dative  without  the  preposition.  Of  twenty-six 
such  passages  in  classic  Greek  in  which  the  word 
baptizo  IS  used  with  the  simple  dative,  Dr.  Co- 
nant  translates  by  the  use  of  the  English  pre- 
positions "  with,'"  "  by  "  in  twent}'  cases,  and  might 
as  well  have  done  so  in  the  other  six.  These 
passages  are  quoted  by  Dale  (p.  208).  The 
Greekly  style  of  Luke  is  the  true  explanation 
of  his  use  of  the  dative  of  means  without  the 
preposition.  The  Hebraistic  style  of  ^latthew 
and  John  equally  accounts  for  their  use  of  the 
preposition  in  the  instrumental  sense  in  confor- 
mity with  the  Hebrew  idiom.  Dr.  Campbell,  of 
Aberdeen,  recognizes  this  Hebraistic  use  of  the 
preposition,  "  which,  answering  to  the  Hebrew 
bcth,  may  denote  zuith  as  well  as  in "  (Dale,  p. 
158).  The  variation  in  the  omission  or  insertion 
of  the  preposition  before  "  water  "  in  the  Greek, 
zi'heji  truly  accGuntcd  for,  gives  a  decisive  argument 
for  the  instrumental  sense.  Prof.  Buttmann  (p. 
1S2)  cites  INIatt.  iii.  11  among  the  examples  of 
"  the  addition  of  the  preposition  tv  to  the  in- 
strumental dative,"  and,  in  explaining,  says  "  not 
in  water."  The  English  Version  gives  the  true 
meaning  by  the  translation  "  with  "  in  each  class 


Baptism  zvith  Water.  195 

of    cases.      This  iuterpretatioa    also    brings    the 
writers  into  harmon}^  with  each  other. 

4.  The  comparison  which  the  Patrists  make 
between  baptism  with  water  and  baptism  with 
blood  gives  the  instrumental  sense  :  "  Thou  dost 
baptize  me  with  water,  that  I  may  baptize  thee  for 
myself  with  thy  blood  "  (Jerome).  ''  They  were 
baptized,  not  with  water,  but  with  their  own 
blood "  (Bassillius).  The  Greek  preposition  is 
used  in  the  instrumental  sense  before  both  water 
and  blood.  As  one's  own  blood  is  not  "  the  ele- 
ment in  which,"  but  the  agenc}^  "  by  which,"  his 
baptism  of  blood  is  effected,  so  water  in  the  cor- 
responding phrase  is  the  agency  or  "  means  by 
v/hich  "  the  baptism  is  performed. 

5.  Several  other  Greek  prepositions  which  de- 
note means,  as  dux,  vrto,  etc.,  are  used  by  the 
Patrists  with  the  Greek  words  zvatcr,  blood,  tears, 
fire,  and  other  baptismal  agencies,  as  instru- 
mental in  producing  various  baptisms.  The  use 
of  these  prepositions  excludes  the  signification 
"dipping  into."  Dale  gives  the  examples  (pp. 
209,  233,  241,  et  passim). 

PLACES   OF   BAPTISM. 

Malt.  iii.  6 :  "  And  were  baptized  of  him  in 
Jordan." 


196    The  Mea ning  and  Powei"  of  Baptism. 

Mark  i.  5  :  "  Were  all  baptized  of  him  in  the 
river  of  Jordan." 

The  use  of  baplizo  in  connection  with  the  place 
of  baptism,  especially  the  river  Jordan,  is  urged 
as  an  argument  for  immersion.  But  this  argu- 
ment, like  the  preceding,  fails  to  establish  the 
meaning  claimed. 

1.  The  preposition  is  used  to  denote  simple 
locality.  It  signifies  ''■in  any  place,  on,  at,  by" 
(Robinson,  ''  New  Testament  Lexicon  "). 

2.  It  is  used  to  denote  locality  in  connection 
with  the  word  baptizo :  "John  did  baptize  in 
the  wilderness  "(Mark  i.  4).  The  wilderness  was 
not  "the  element  in  which"  John  baptized  the 
people,  but  the  place  where  he  baptized  them. 
It  denotes  simple  localit3^  He  also  baptized  in 
other  places — "in  Bethabara  beyond  Jordan" 
(John  i.  28,  X.  40),  in  zEnon  (iii.  23),  and  else- 
where. There  were  numerous  localities  where 
baptism  was  performed,  as  Jerusalem,  etc.  No- 
thing can  be  determined  respecting  the  mode  of 
baptism  from  the  local  use  of  the  preposition. 

3.  The  river  Jordan  is  a  locality,  and  is  spoken 
of  as  a  locality  in  connection  with  baptism  :  "  Then 
cometh  Jesus  from  Galilee  upon  [_e7ti\  the  Jordan 
unto  John,  to  be  baptized  of  him  "  (Matt.  iii.  13). 
Justin    Martyr   speaks    of  Jordan  as   a    locality : 


Baptism  iviih  Water.  197 

"  While  John  yet  dwelt  upon  [j'ttz]  the  river  Jor 
dan,  Christ  came."  .  .  .  "And  Jesus  having 
come  upon  [f^^'J  tlie  river  Jordan,  where  John 
baptized"  (Dale,  p.  376).  Dr.  Carson,  p.  351, 
says:  ''When  we  wish  merely  to  designate  the 
place  of  baptism,  we  always  use  111^  Prof.  Har- 
rison gives  this  preposition  the  meaning  at,  on, 
near,  and  illustrates  by  such  examples  as  Herod., 
i.  'j6'.  "A  city  on  [e'j'J  the  Euxine  Sea";  Xen., 
"  Anab.,"  iv.  8,  22:  "A  Grecian  city  on  [fV]  the 
Pontus  Euxinus  "  (Dale,  p.  352).  Gesenius  and 
Rosenmuller  give  it  the  same  local  signification  in 
connection  with  rivers  and  streams.  Di".  Dale 
gives  several  examples  in  which  it  is  used  to 
denote  locality  in  rivers  and  seas,  yet  not  in  the 
water.  Dr.  Carson,  discussing  the  passage  in  Ho- 
mer's "  Iliad,"  xviii.  520,  which  represents  an  am- 
buscade of  soldiers  as  lodging  in  the  river,  says: 
"  It  was  within  the  banks  of  the  river  that  the  am- 
buscade lodged  "  (p.  338).  The  soldiers  had  a  fine, 
dr}^  camping-ground  in  the  river  between  the 
banks  where  the}'  could  lie  in  wait.  Of  Ul3'sses, 
who,  escaping  from  shipwreck,  lodged  all  night  in 
the  river  under  shelter  of  the  bank.  Dr.  Carson 
also  says,  p.  339:  "  He  might  be  in  the  river, 
yd  not  in  the  Vv\\TER ;  all  zvithin  the  banks  is  the 
river.''     People,  then,  might  be  in  the  river,  and 


198    The  iMeaning  and  Poiver  of  Baptism. 

be  baptized  ia  the  river,  and  not  go  into  the 
water.  There  is  ample  room  between  the  upper 
bank  of  the  river  Jordan  and  the  lower  bank,  a 
distance  of  an  eighth  of  a  mile — forty  rods — 
where  a  multitude  of  people  could  stand  and  be 
baptized  without  going  into  the  water.  The 
testimony  of  travellers  makes  this  plain.  Maun- 
drell  says:  "After  having  descended  the  outer- 
most bank,  you  go  about  a  furlong  on  a  level 
strand  before  you  come  to  the  immediate  bank 
of  the  river"  (Dale,  p.  373).  Another  sa3'S  :  "  The 
Jordan  may  be  said  to  have  two  banks,  of  which 
the  inner  marks  the  ordinary  height  of  the  stream, 
and  the  outer  its  elevation  during  the  rainy  sea- 
son "  (p.  325). 

4.  When  the  word  baptizo  is  used  in  \{.^ primary 
classic  signification  with  the  Greek  preposition 
iv  to  denote  a  baptism,  the  baptized  object  RE- 
MAINS in  the  clement,  and  is  not  taken  out  of  it. 

Josephus  :  "And  there,  according  to  command, 
being  baptized  in  a  pool  by  the  Galatians,  he 
dies."  Whiston  translates  it  "was  drowned" 
("  Wars  of  the  Jews,"  i.  22,  2). 

Polybius :  "  Baptized  and  sinking  in  the  pools, 
.  .  .  many  of  them  perished "  ("  Classic  Bap- 
tism," p.  258). 

Plotinus :  "  Siie  dies ;    .    .   .    and  death  to  her. 


Baptism  with  Water.  199 

while  yet  baptized  in  the  body,  is  to  sink  in  mat- 
ter, and  to  be  iilled  with  it  "  ("  C.  B.,"  p.  264). 

The  soul  remains  in  the  condition  of  baptism, 
and  is  changed  to  corruption  by  the  influence  of 
the  bod}^  upon  it. 

Alexander  xA.phrodisias:  "  Baptized  in  the  depth 
of  the  body"  ("  C.  B.,"  p.  264). 

This  Greek  writer  thus  expresses  the  death  of 
the  perceptive  power: 

"  In  this  class  of  baptisms,  in  every  case,  with- 
out exception,  the  baptized  object  is  not  taken  out 
of  the  clement,  but  remains  within  it  "  ("Johannic 
Baptism,"  p.  368).  The  word,  therefore,  is  not 
used  in  the  New  Testament  in  its  primarj^  sig"nifi- 
cation  in  connection  with  the  Greek  preposition. 
It  is  not  to  its  use  in  the  classics  that  w^e  must 
look  for  its  meaning,  but  to  its  secondary  use  in 
the  Jewish  Greek  spoken  in  Palestine.  Dr.  Car- 
son and  Dr.  Campbell  lay  no  stress  on  the  prepo- 
sition, for  they  well  know  that  its  use  affords  no 
evidence  of  dipping  the  person  into  w^atcr.  Dr. 
Carson's  argument  is  wholly  different.  His 
argument  is  this:  "There  can  be  no  adequate 
cause  alleged  for  going  to  the  river,"  except  for 
the  purpose  of  immersion  (p.  126). 

But  there  is  no  intimation  of  this  reason,  and 
no  fact  supporting  it,  in  the  narrative.     On  the 


200    The  ]\[caniiig  a?id  Po7vcr  of  Baptism. 

other  hand,  a  good  reason  lor  baptizing-  in  this 
locahly  is  found  in  the  fact  that  "his  peciihar 
character  as  a  v.'itness  led  him  to  make  the  wil- 
derness bordering  on  the  Jordan  his  place  of 
abode"  (Olshausen,  I.  259;  Luke  i.  80,  iii.  2). 
No  reason  can  be  assigned  why  he  should  go 
elsewhere.  Tiiis  was  his  abode,  and  where  he 
lived  there  he  preached,  and  where  he  preached 
tlicrc  he  baptized. 

An  adequate  and  a  most  appropriate  reason 
was  in  "the  cJiaractcr  of  the  water.  Both  Gentile 
and  Jew  attached  a  specially  purifying  value  to 
running  water"  (Dale,  p.  332).  The  use  of 
running  water  was  required  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment for  purihcation.  "And  he  shall  dip  them 
.  .  .  in  the  riainiitg  water,  and  sprinkle  the 
house  seven  times:  and  he  shall  cleanse  the 
house  v»'ith  the  blood  of  the  bird,  and  with  the 
running  v/ater"  (Lev.  xiv.  51,  52).  Philo,  the 
Jew,  says  :  "  It  is  the  custom  of  nearly  all  others 
to  sprinlclc  themselves  for  purification  with  pure 
water;  man}'  with  that  of  the  sea,  some  with  that 
of  r/Vrrj- "  (332).  The  Roman  high-priest  directs 
the  Sabine  preparing  to  worship  Diana:  "Sprin- 
kle 3'ourself  first  with  the  living  stream.  The  Ti- 
ber flows  before  you  in  the  bottom  of  the  val- 
ley."    Ovid:  "  The  hanrls  should  be  washed  with 


Bapiisvi  ijith  Water.  loi 

living  water."  Viri^il :  "Sprinkling'  the  body 
with  rivc)-  water"  (333).  The  general  sentiment, 
the  •  usual  custom,  and  obvious  propriety  were 
adequate  to  lead  John  to  use  pure  running  water 
in  his  baptism,  whose  symbolic  purity  was  in- 
tended to  represent  emblematically  the  purifying 
influence  of  the  Holy  Ghost  on  the  soul, 

JOHN  III.  23 : 

"Because  there  was  much  water  there." 

Dr.  Carson,  p.  476,  says :  "  The  reason  alleged 
for  John's  baptizing  in  ^non  implies  that  bap- 
tism w^as  immersion";  otherwise  "there  would 
have  been  no  need  of  much  water."  But  the 
quantity  of  water  surely  could  not  have  been  the 
reason  for  going  to  ^non  to  baptize.  There 
was  a  far  greater  quantity  in  the  river  Jordan, 
only  ten  miles  away.  The  true  reason  is  given 
by  the  Evangelist.  Jesus  and  John  were  botJi 
baptizing  in  the  same  vicinity.  Both  parties 
were  baptizing  in  the  neighborliood  of  each  other 
— Jesus  and  his  disciples,  "  and  John  also'^—ho,- 
cause  there  were  many  places  for  baptizing,  so 
that  both  could  baptize  without  interference. 
The  expression  in  the  original  is  in  the  plural 
number,  vdara  noWa — many  zuatcrs — and  it  is 
translated  in  the  plural  in  all  other  places  (Rev.  i. 


202     The  Mcani7ig  and  Power  of  Baptisjn. 

15,  xiv.  2,  xvii.  I,  xix.  6;  see  also  Ezek.  xix,  10; 
2  Kings  V.  12;  Judith  vii.  17).  The  number  of 
places  for  baptizing,  and  not  the  quantity  of 
water,  is  the  reason  given  ;  and  this  reason  is  not 
given  solely  to  account  for  the  fact  that  John  was 
baptizing  in  that  place,  but  for  the  fact  that  both 
parties  were  baptizing  near  each  other — Jesus 
and  his  disciples,  "and  John  also^  The  number 
of  fountains  of  water  afforded  facilities  for  the 
accommodation  of  both  for  the  purpose  of  bap- 
tizing, and  also  for  any  other  uses  of  the  water 
that  need  might  require.  Ambrose  says  "  tvrelve 
springs,"  and  his  remark  that  they  "  must  be 
besprinkled  b}'  these  fountains"  (Dale,  p.  317) 
shows  that  it  was  not  quantity  of  water  or  dip- 
ping in  water  that  entered  into  his  idea  of  this 
baptism. 

The  abundance  of  water  could  not  have  been 
the  reason  for  leaving  the  Jordan  and  going  to 
-^non,  for  there  was  a  greater  abundance  in  the 
river.  The  reason'  is  found  in  the  season  of  the 
year.  It  v.-as  in  the  month  of  April,  just  after  the 
Jewish  Passover,  when  the  river  Jordan  is  full  to 
overflowing,  rising  above  its  upper  banks,  and 
"  bearing  on  its  swelling  waters  all  th.e  unclean 
things  which  were  the  result  of  a  year's  accumu- 
lation   within    its  wide,    extended    outer   banks," 


Baptism  zvith  Water.  203 

and  the  waters  become  impure  and  unfit  to  sym- 
bolize the  spiritual  purity  in  which  the  very 
essence  of  baptism  consists.  At  ^'Enon  springs 
of  pure  water  abound.  The  waters  of  ^Enon  are 
described  by  Oriental  travellers  as  "an  assem- 
blage of  fountains  and  pools,  .  .  .  springs  of  the 
purest  water,  six  miles  northeast  of  Jerusalem  " 
(Coleman,  pp.  26S,  269).  The  secondary  mean- 
ing of  baptizo,  denoting  purification,  gives  a 
good  and  adequate  reason  why  the  baptism  was  at 
one  time  at  the  Jordan  and  at  another  at  ^Enon. 
This  signification  harmonizes  all  the  facts,  and 
gives  a  solution  to  all  appropriate  enquiries. 

MATT.    III.    16: 

"  Went  up  straightway  out  of  the  water." 

An  aro^ument  for  immersion  is  drawn  from 
the  English  translation  of  the  Greek  preposi- 
tion in  this  verse  by  the  phrase  "out  of."  But 
the  correct  translation  of  this  Greek  preposition 
{ano)  is  from.  It  is  translated  from  in  the  same 
chapter  only  a  few  verses  previous.  "  Who  hath 
warned  you  to  flee  from  \a7to^^  the  wrath  to 
come?"  (v.  7).  The  Baptist  Version  of  the  New 
Testament'translates  it  from. 

It  is  also  translated /ri?7/^  in  Luke  iv.  i  :    "  Jesus 


204    The  Mean  ill  o-  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

.  .  .  returned  /ro!/i  [a'Tto]  the  Jordan."  It  is 
translated  from  two  hundred  and  thirty-five 
times  in  the  iirst  four  books  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, and  out  of  on\y  forty-two  times.  "  It  occurs 
in  the  Gospel  by  Matthew  one  hundred  and  nine 
times,  and  is  rendered  just  sixty-five  times  froui, 
and  only  ten  times  07it  of  (Theodore,  p.  262). 
Dr.  Carson  says  :  "  I  admit  the  proper  translation 
of  apo  is  from,  and  not  out  of  (p.  126).  Professor 
Stuart  says:  "I  have  found  no  example  where 
t!ie  preposition  arro  is  applied  to  indicate  a  move- 
ment out  of  a  liquid  into  the  air  "  (p.  320). 

ACTS   VIII.    38: 

"Went  down  both  into  the  water." 

In  tins  passage  also  the  preposition  is  thought 
bv  some  to  favor  immersion.  ])ut  the  Greek 
preposition  (fzs)  might  with  equal  propriet}-  be 
translated  to.  In  this  very  chapter  it  occurs 
eleven  times,  and  is  translated  into  only  once.  In 
all  the  other  places  it  is  translated  by  some  other 
word.  Elsewhere  in  the  New  Testament  it  is 
translated  to,  toward,  inito,  by,  at,  on,  and  other 
words.  It  is  translated  to,  unto.,  two  hundred  and 
eight\-five  times  in  the  tirst  five  books  of  the 
New  Testament.     "  The  preposition  (f/^)  occurs 


Baptism  tvith.  Water.  205 

single  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  tzvo  hundred 
and  sixty-four  times,  and  is  rendered  into  only 
sixty-one  times  ;  and  of  tliese  sixty-one  times 
there  are  twenty-six  in  which  it  might  properly 
be  rendered  to  or  toivard.  .  .  ,  The  evidence 
from  this  single  source  is  as  seven  or  eight  to  one 
against  the  supposition  that  the  inspired  writer 
intended  to  saj'  that  Philip  and  the  eunuch  went 
into  the  water"  (Theodore,  p.  281).  I  will  give 
a  few  examples  of  its  use.  Mark  xiii.  3:  "  lie 
sat  upon  [fzV]  the  Mount  of  Olives."  John  xxi. 
4:  "Jesus  stood  on  [f/s]  the  shore."  Acts  xxvi. 
14:  "  When  we  were  all  fallen  to  [f^s]  the  earth." 
Matt.  xxi.  I  :  "  When  they  drew  nigh  unto  [f/s] 
Jcrnsalem  "  (not  into,  for  they  were  two  miles 
distant).  John  xx.  i,  11:  "Cometh  early  unto 
[£z?]  the  sepulchre  [not  into],  but  stood  without." 
John  XX.  3-5  :  "  Came  to  [^zV]  the  sepulchre,  .  .  . 
yet  went  he  not  in."  John  xi.  38  :  "  Jesus  cometh 
to  [f/b]  the  grave."  2  Kings  vi.  4  (Sept.)  :  "  When 
they  came  to  [fz?]  Jordan,  they  cut  down  wood." 
They  did  not  go  into  the  water  to  cut  wood. 
The  wood  was  on  the  level  strand  in  the  river 
between  the  upper  and  lower  banks.  Matt.  xv. 
24:  "I  am  not  sent  but  unto  [fz?]  the  lost  sheep 
(.f  the  house  of  Israel."  We  are  amply  justified 
in  saying  of  this  preposition,  as  Dr.  Carson  snys 


2o6    The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

of  ocno  :  "  It  would  have  its  ineauing  iiiUy  veri- 
fied if  the}"  had  only  gone  down  to  the  edge  ot 
the  water"  (p.  126).  He  admits  tliat  "  eii  might 
be  used  if  the  advance  was  only  to  the  margin  "' 
(p.  132),  and  that  it  "sometimes  denotes  motion 
to  a  place  that  ends  on  this  side  of  the  object" 
(p.  135)- 

ACTS   VIII.  39: 

"  When  they  were  come  up  out  of  the  water." 

On  the  preposition  (f?^),  translated  out  of  in 
this  passage,  Y^w  Carson  relies  with  more  confi- 
dence. He  says:  "It  alwa3's  supposes  that  the 
point  of  departure  is  within  the  object"  (p.  130). 
"  It  never,  in  a  single  instance,  designates  merely 
from;  it  is  alwa^ys  cut  of"  (p.  355).  This,  like 
man}'  other  statements  too  hastily  made,  reveals 
the  need  of  a  more  thorough  investigation  of  the 
usage  of  the  Greek  prepositions.  The  statement 
is  not  sustained  by  the  facts.  Winer,  p.  366, 
says:  "  It  originally  denotes  issuing y>^w  within''; 
but  he  further  says,  p.  367:  "Sometimes  it  de- 
notes mere  direction  fromi"  In  his  "  N.  T.  Lex- 
icon," Robinson  gives  the  meaning  from,  as  well 
as  out  of :  "  After  words  implying  motion  of  any 
kind  .  .  .  from  anyplace  or  object,  .  .  .  thus 
marking  the  point  from  wliich  the  direction  sets 


Baptisiii  ivith  Watc7\  207 

off."  Alexander  Buttmaun,  "  N.  T.  Gn,"  p.  322  : 
"  The  fundamental  signilication  of  ano — viz.,  de- 
pi.rlure  from  the  exterior  of  an  object — is  the  p]"e- 
valent  one  in  the  New  Testament  " ;  and  on  p. 
326  he  says  :  "  Owing  to  the  affinity  in  significa- 
tion between  hi  and  ano,  it  is  natural  that  both 
should  often  serve  to  denote  one  and  the  same 
relation."  In  John  xii.  32  Jesus  says:  "If  I  be 
lifted  up  from  [f«]  the  earth."  Here  the  prepo- 
sition denotes  an  "exterior  relation."  The  move- 
ment' is  not  from  a  point  zvithin  the  earth,  but 
from  a  point  en  the  exterior  surfaee  of  the  earth  ; 
not  out  of,  but  from,  the  earth.  Acts  xii.  7  :  "  His 
chains  fell  off  from  \_hi\  his  hands."  So  Prof. 
Hackett  translates,  and  so  the  Baptist  Version,  as 
also  the  English  Version.  Matthew,  xxvii.  60, 
says :  "  He  rolled  a  great  stone  to  the  door  of  the 
sepulchre";  and  Mark,  xv.  46:  "Rolled  a  stone 
unto  [£;r/]  the  door."  When,  therefore,  John,  xx. 
I,  says:  "Mary  Magdalene  .  .  .  seeth  the 
stone  taken  awa}^  from  \_sk'\  the  sepulchre,"  the 
meruiing  is  not  that  the  stone  was  rolled  out  of  X\\q 
sepulchre — for  it  had  not  been  rolled  into  the  sepul- 
chre— but  unto  the  door  to  bar  the  entrance.  Matt., 
xxviii.  2,  says :  "  The  angel  .  .  .  rolled  back 
the  sionc  from  [aTto  in  composition  with  the  verb] 
the  door."     This  illustrates  what  Buttmann  says 


2oS     The  Mean  in  i^  a?:d  Poivcr  of  Baptism. 

I 

of  the  affinily  of  the  preposit;ons   lxtto  and    ^n  to  \ 

denote    "  departure-  from    the    exterior   of  an    ob-  | 

ject."     Mark   xvi.   3:    "Who  shall  roll  us  away  | 

the  stone  from   \sk\  the  door?"     The  subject  is  : 

fully  discussed   by   Dr.  Dale  ("  C.  and   P.  B.,  "  p.  \ 

182  seq.)  j 

The  word  has  received   a  diversity  of  transla-  i 

tion  in  the  English  Version.     It  is  translated /;-<?;;/  | 

one   hundred  and  two  times  in  the  first  five  books  ; 

ot  the  New   Testament,  and  out  of  only  seventy-  '• 
nine.     "  The  word  occurs  single  in  the  Acts  of  the 

Apostles  sixty-four  times,  and  it  is   translated  out  , 

of  onlv  five  times,  and   one   of  the  five   is  where  | 

our  Version   has  it,  '  were  come    up   out  of  the  i 

water'"    (Theodore,  p.  282).       In  addition  to  all  | 

this  is  the  fact  adduced  by  Fairchlld  ("  Baptism,"  < 
p.     79)    that    "  the     Greek     writers,     when    they 

wished,  by  the  force  of  the  words,  to  express  the  \ 

idea  of  going  out  of  usually  doubled  the  preposi-  j 

tion  EK,  placing  it  beiorc  the  noun  and  prefixing  \ 

it  also  to  the  verb."     This  is  peculiarly  noticeable  ! 

in  the   style   of  the  author  oi  the  Book  of  Acts.'  { 

No  less  than  "twenty  examples"  of  this  double  I 
use  of  tK  occur  in  the  Acts.     But  in  Acts  viii.  39 

the  single  he  is  used.     If  Luke  had  intended  to  ; 

express  the  idea  of  out  of,  he  would  not-  have  de-  \ 

viated  from  his  usual  mode  of  expressing  that  idea.  j 


Bap  I  ism  ivith  Water.  209 

There  is  no  decisive  evidence  in  th.-  language 
ot  the  sacred  writer  in  this  passage  in  favor  of 
nnmersion.  Prof.  Stuart  says :  "  The  preposi- 
tion in  .  .  .  by  no  means  of  necessity  implies 
it,"  and  he  translates,  "  TJicy  zvent  up  from  the 
water'''  (p.  326). 

JOHN   III.   25  : 

"  Then  there  arose  a  question  between  some 
of  John's  disciples  and  the  Jews  about  puri- 
fying." 

The  question  about  "  purifying"  was  a  cfuestion 
about  "  baptizing."  Baptizing  is  the  subject  of 
which  the  Evangelist  is  discoursing  in  the  verses 
preceding  and  following,  and  therefore  includ- 
ing, this  passage.  To  treat  this  verse  as  if  it  were 
not  connected  in  the  course  of  the  narrative  with 
what  stands  related  to  it  before  and  after  is 
wholl}-  arbitrar}'. 

Theophylact  says:  "There  was  a  dispute  con- 
cerning baptism  between  the  disciples  of  John, 
moved  with  rivalr}',  and  a  certain  Jew.  For 
the  Jew  placed  the  claims  of  Christ  before  those 
of  John  ;  but  the  disciples  of  John  gave  the  pre- 
cedence to  their  master's  baptism.  Disputing 
concerning  purification — tliat  is,  baptism — they 
came  to  their  master"  (Dr.  E.  Beecher,  \).  214). 


2  lo    The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

Chrysostom  :"  There  was  a  dispute  .  .  .  con- 
cerning piLrification.  For  tlic  disciples  of  John, 
being  jealous  of  the  disciples  of  Christ,  and  of 
Christ  himself,  when  they  saw  them  bapiizing, 
began  to  dispute  with  those  who  were  baptized.^  as 
if  their  own  baptism  was  superior"  (p.  214). 

Hermann  Cremcr  ('' Bib.-Theo.  Lex.  of  New 
Testament  Greek,"  p.  311)  says:  "The  baptism 
both  of  John  and  Jesus  is  designated  piiripication 
in  John  iii,  25,  by  which  the  connection  between  it 
and  the  ritual  process  of  purification  (cf.  Ezek. 
xxxvi,  25)  is  made  evident." 

Dr.  Dale  ("  C.  and  P.  B.,"  p.  355)  says  that  the 
"  purification  in  John  iii.  25  is  used  in  its  generic 
character,  to  include  both  the  baptism  of  the  Jew — 
ceremonial  purif)'ing  ;  and  the  baptism  of  repen- 
tance— the  spiritual  purification  of  John." 

Dr.  J.  J.  Owen,  in  his  comment  on  the  passage, 
says:  "About  purifying — i.e.,  about  the  nature 
and  efficacy  of  baptismal  purification." 

Alford  (in  loco)  says  :  "  John  and  our  Lord  were 
baptizing  near  to  one  another,"  .  .  .  and  the- 
"dispute"  was  "about  the  relative  importance 
of  the  two  baptisms."  Whether  the  dispute  in- 
volved a  comparison  between  the  baptism  of  John 
and  the  baptism  of  Jesus,  or  between  the  symbol 
baptism  of  John  and  the  ceremonial   baptism  of 


Baptism  with  Water.  2 1 1 

Judaism,  it  was,  as  nearly  all  Christian  interpre- 
ters explain  it,  and  as  the  course  of  thought  in  the 
fvangelist  requires  us  to  understand  it,  a  dispute 
about  baptism,  purification, 

THE   MODE   OF    BAPTISM. 

The  essence  of  baptism  does  not  consist  in  the 
mode  in  which  the  baptismal  agency  is  applied, 
but  in  the  condition  effected  by  the  agency.  The 
word  baptizo  does  not  express  any  act,  either 
sprinkling,  pouring,  dipping,  or  any  other  act,  but 
in  sacred  use  it  expresses  a  condition  of  ritual 
purit}'  emblematical  of  the  spiritual  purity  of  the 
soul.  Sprinkling  and  pouring,  and  not  dipping 
the  body  into  water,  are  the  divinely-authorized 
acts  by  which  ritual  baptism,  whether  ceremonial 
or  symbol,  is  effected. 

1.  The  act  of  dipping,  putting  into  water  and 
immediately  taking  out,  is  not  expressed  in  Greek 
by  the  word  baptizo,  but  by  BAPTO.  Baptizo,  in 
classic  use,  does  not  take  out  wlrat  it  puts  under 
water.  In  the  New  Testament  persons  ai-e  never 
put  under  water  for  baptism.  They  are  baptized 
zvitli  water. 

2.  Sprinkling  was  the  act  which,  by  command 
of  God,  was  employed  during  the  whole  period 
of  the    Hebrew    commonwealth,  from    jNIoses  to 


2 1 2     llic  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

Christ,  for  applying  the  ashes  of  a  heifer,  sacrifi- 
cial blood,  and  pure  water  to  effect  ceremonial 
purification  ;  and  this  ceremonial  purification,  in 
the  times  of  John  the  Baptist  and  Christ,  was 
called  baptism,  and  had  been  so  called  during  all 
the  ages  in  which  the  Jews  had  spoken  the  Greek 
language.  This  mode  of  baptism  was  in  constant, 
daily  use  among  the  people,  and  had  the  authority 
of  divine  command  and  universal  practice.  To 
this  ever\'-day,  current  use  of  the  word  in  the 
common  language  of  the  Jewish  people  we  are  to 
go  to  learn  the  meaning  and  mode  of  baptism 
rathei-  than  to  classic  Greek.  It  was  not  classic 
but  Hellenistic  Greek  which  was  the  vernacular 
of  the  Jewish  people. 

3.  Judaic  baptism  was  a  type  of  Christian  bap- 
tism ;  Judaic  baptism  was  the  purification  of  the 
body  from  ceremonial  defilement,  and  the  bap- 
tismal agencies  were  applied  by  sprinkling.  This 
purification  of  the  bod}',  as  a  ceremonial  effect, 
was  perfect,  and  was  well  suited  to  be,  what  Paul 
and  the  Christian  fathers  represent  it,  a  type  of 
the  purification  of  the  soul  by  the  sprinkling  of  the 
blood  of  Jesus.  Christian  baptism  is  the  purifica- 
tion of  the  soul  by  the  Holy  Ghost  through  faith 
in  the  blood  of  Christ,  represented  in  emblem  by 
the  baptismal  use  of  pure  water. 


Baptism  with  Water.  2 1 3 

4.  Sprinkling  and  pouring  are  the  divinely- 
chosen  forms  by  which  the  prophetic  Scriptures 
declare  that  the  power  of  the  blood  of  Christ  and 
the  influence  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  changing  the 
condition  of  the  soul  shall  be  represented  in  the 
times  of  the  Gospel  dispensation.  Thus  Isa.  lii. 
15:  "So  shall  he  sprinkle  many  nations."  Ezek. 
xxxvi.  25:  "Thus  will  I  sprinkle  clean  water  up- 
on you,  and  ye  shall  be  clean.  .  .  .  And  I  will 
put  m}'  Spirit  within  you."  Joel  ii.  28:  "I  will 
pour  out  my  Spirit  upon  all  flesh."  The  fulfilment 
of  this  prophetic  announcement  by  the  POV'i^ING 
OUT  of  the  Spirit  in  the  baptism  of  Pentecost  re- 
cognizes the  literal  act  of  "  pouring  out"  to  effect 
ritual  baptism  as  the  physical  basis  of  this  meta- 
phorical language  to  denote  the  baptism  of  the 
Holy  Ghost. 

5.  The  Christian  fathers  often  speak  of  sprink- 
ling and  pouring  as  acts  which  effect  the  condition 
which  is  expressed  by  baptism.  Some  quota- 
tions in  illustration  are  given  in  the  second  chap- 
ter of  this  book.  The  practice  of  immersion 
among  them  did  not  arise  from  a  belief  that  bap- 
tism consisted  in  the  mere  act  of  immersion,  for 
they  did  not  so  believe;  but  it  arose  from  their 
great  error  that  water  must  receive  a  divine, 
spiritual  quality  b}^  the  agency  of  the  Holy  Ghost 


214    ^-^^  Meaning  and  Poiver  of  Baptism. 

to  give  it  power  to  effect  Christian  baptism,  and 
tiiat  this  pozver  could  be  more  effectuall}'  commu- 
nicated to  the  baptized,  the  more  completely  the 
water  could  come  in  contact  with  his  person. 
From  this  error  arose  the  practice  of  baptizing 
men,  women,  and  children  naked,  and  other  ob- 
jectionable observances.  The  agency  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  according  to  the  Scriptures,  is  exerted 
directly  on  the  soul,  not  on  the  ivatcr.  The  Avater 
not  only  has  in  itself  no  saving  efficacy,  but  it  re- 
ceives no  saving  virtue  from  an}'  action  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  upon  it.  It  is  a  symbol,  and  only  a 
symbol,  of  the  real  baptism  of  the  soul  by  the  Holy 
Spirit  of  God. 


CHAPTER  X. 

THE  BAPTISM  OF  JESUS. 

BAPTIS-M  OF  JESUS  BY  JOHN. 

HIRTY  years  of  the  lite  of  Jesus  had  passed. 
In  his  home  at  Nazareth  among  the  green 
hills  of  Galilee,  far  from  the  Temple  and  luider 
influences  more  than  human,  "  the  child  grczv, 
and  waxed  strong-  in  spirit,  filled  with  wisdom," 
until,  in  the  full  maturity  of  his  powers  as  the 
Son  of  Man,  he  was  ready  to  enter  upon  his 
great  mission.  The  time  had  come  for  him  to 
commence  his  public  ministr}^  as  the  Messiah. 
A  mighty  awakening  had  been  produced  by  the 
preaching  of  the  Forerunner,  and  the  valley  of 
the  Jordan  was  alive  with  the  multitudes  who, 
from  all  parts  of  Palestine,  were  flocking  to  his 
baptism.  The  great  design  of  John  v/as  to  pre- 
pare the  people  to  receive  One  who  was  greater 
than  he.  It  was  for  this  purpose  that  he  preached 
the  baptism  of  repentance,  and  administered  the 
symbol  baptism  with  water  to  those  who  accepted 
his  preaching.     Jesus  now  came  with   the   rest. 


2 1 6    The  ]\Ieaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

and  made  application  to  John  for  baptism.  The 
Baptist  felt  the  incongruity  and  declined,  saying  : 
"  I  have  need  to  be  baptized  of  thee,  and  comest 
thou  to  me  ?"  Jesus  and  John  were  cousins,  and 
it  is  not  unlikely  that  they  had  often  piet  in 
Jerusalem  at  the  Passovers,  and  that  John  was 
acquainted  with  the  prophecies  which  his  father, 
Zacharias,  had  uttered  concerning  Jesus.  Al- 
though John  did  not  know  Jesus  as  the  Messiah, 
the  sign  from  heaven  indicating  him  and  author- 
izing John  to  proclaim  him  to  the  people  as  such 
being  not  yet  given,  yet  he  recognized  him  as 
superior  to  himself,  and  as  one  too  pure  to  need 
such  a  baptism  as  his.  He  may  have  known 
what  a  sinless  and  holy  life  Jesus  had  led  at 
Nazareth,  or  he  may  have  now  received  a  super- 
natural intimation  of  the  character  of  this  new 
candidate  for  baptism.  But  Jesus  removed  his 
scruples,  saying:  "Suffer  it  to  be  so  now:  for 
thus  it  bccometh  us  to  fulfil  all  riglUcousncss." 

What  was  the  baptism  which  Jesus  received 
from  John?  He  did  not  receive  "  the  baptism  of 
John"  which  "all  the  people"  received.  Neither 
"  the  baptism  of  repentance  "  which  John  preach- 
ed, nor  the  ritual  baptism  "  with  water  into  re- 
pentance "  whicli  he  administered,  wa»  appro- 
priate to  liie  Sinless  One.     "  It  is  one  thing  to  be 


The  Baptism  of  Jesus.  217 

bapt-ized  by  John,  and  quite  another  to  receive  the 
'  baptism  of  John.'  "  There  is  a  div^ersity  of 
baptisms.  "  Baptism  is  not  one,"  sa\'s  Ambrose; 
"there  are  many  kinds  of  baptisms."  Johannic 
baptism  differs  from  Judaic  baptism,  and  Chris- 
tian baptism  differs  from  each  of  the  other  two. 
Robert  Hall,  an  open-communion  Baptist,  whose 
memory  will  ever  live,  even  to  the  latest  age, 
wrote  on  "  The  Essential  Difference  between 
Christian  Baptism  and  the  Baptism  of  John." 

The  baptism  of  John  was  a  "  baptism  of  repen- 
tance." This  baptism  was  for  sinners,  but  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  v/as  not  a  sinner.  It  demanded 
"repentance,"  but  He  who  never  sinned  did  not 
need  repentance.  It  required  its  subjects  to 
"bring  forth  fruits  meet  for  repentance";  but 
the  perfect  life  of  "the  ITolv  One  and  the  Just" 
could  sustain  no  such  relation.  Others  were 
baptized  "confessing  their  sins";  Jesus  had  no 
sins  to  confess.  The  promise  of  "  remission  of 
sins"  was  given  in  "the  baptism  of  John."  It 
was  a  "  baptism  of  repentance  into  the  remission 
of  sins."  But  so  far  from  receiving  "remission 
of  sins,"  the  pure  and  holy  "Lamb  of  God"  was 
about  to  enter  upon  his  Messianic  work  as  the 
sole  means  of  procuring  this  blessing  for  those 
who  need  it.     "  The  essence  of  John's  ritual  bap- 


2 1 8     The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baplis7n, 

tisiii  is  found  in  its  S}-mbolization  of  puritication 
in  the  soul  thi'ough  repentance  and  remission  of 
sin.  But  in  the  Lord  Jesus  there  was  no  basis 
for  such  symbolization,  and  consequently  there 
was  no  basis  for  the  baptism  of  John  "  i^'*  C.  and 
P.  B.,"  p.  28). 

It  is  not  needful  to  discuss,  or  even  enumerate, 
the  different  views  which  luive  been  taken  of  the 
object  of  Christ's  baptism.  No  less  than  ten 
different  opinions  are  referred  to  by  Meyer,  as 
quoted  by  Langc  on  JMatthew  (p.  76).  The  true 
significance  of  the  personal  baptism  of  Jesus  by 
John  is  seen  in  the  words  of  Jesus,  "  Thus  it  be- 
cometh  us  to  fulfil  all  righteousness,"  and  in  the 
import  given  to  those  words  in  the  events  of  the 
subsequent  narrative.  The  baptism  of  Jesus  v.as 
his  consecration  to  his  peculiar  work  as  the 
Messiah.  It  was  to  prepare  the  nation  to  re- 
ceive him  in  this  capacity  that  his  forerunner  was 
divinelv  commissioned.  This  was  the  signifi- 
cance of  the  sublime  scene  that  followed  his  bap- 
tism. This  was  the  purport  of  the  opening  of  the 
heavens  upon  his  gaze  while  he  was  praying  on 
the  bank  of  the  river.  This  was  the  significance 
of  the  descent  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  who  came 
down  through  the  disparted  firmament  "  in  a 
bodily  shape  like  a  dove,"  and   rested  upon   his 


The  Baptism  of  Jesus.  2 1 9 

head.  This,  also,  was  the  meaning  of  that  divine 
voice  which  came  from  the  rent  sky.  sa3Mng: 
"  Tliis  is  my  beloved  Son,  in  whom  I  am  well 
pleased."  God  had  "sent  forth  his  Son"  to 
accomplish  the  work  of  human  redemption.  As 
the  house  of  Aaron  were  set  apart  to  their  typi- 
cal priesthood  before  the  Advent  b}"  appropriate 
rites,  so  now,  when  "  the  fulness  of  the  time  was 
come,"  Jesus,  the  "  Great  High-Priest,"  was  in- 
augurated into  his  office  by  a  rite  administered 
by  one  chosen  of  God  and  fitted  by  his  peculiar 
training  and  mission  to  perform  this  service. 
This  baptism  of  Jesus  by  John  was  "a  c(jvenant 
baptism."  It  was  a  baptism  i}ito  his  ivork  as  Mes- 
siah. "In  it  there  is  an  announcement  of  the 
work  of  redemption,  and  a  covenant  engagement 
by  the  Son  of  God  to  accomplish  it.  This  an- 
nouncement and  assumption  of  covenant  obliga- 
tion the  Father  accepts  and  declares  himself 
'  well  pleased.'  The  Holy  Ghost  makes  like 
declaration  by  descending  upon  and  baptizing 
the  covenanting  Son  for  his  amazing  work  now 
assumed  at  Jordan,  but  '  finished '  only  on  Cal- 
vary "  (Dale,  p.  31). 

When  Jesus  says,  "  Thus  it  becometh  us  to  ful- 
fil all  righteousness,"  he  does  not  refer  to  the 
work  of  repentance  required  of  the  other  subjects 


2  20    The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

of  John's  baptism,  but  to  Jiis  own  work  in  his 
Messianic  office.  His  baptism  by  John  was  an 
appropriate  rite,  requisite  as  an  induction  into 
the  pecuHar  work  wliich  he  undertook  on  behalf 
of  mankind.  As  Rudolf  Stier  ("  Words  of  the 
Lord  Jesus")  says :  "  This  baptism  is  the  true 
beginning  point  of  that  obedience  the  consum- 
mation of  which,  in  the  death  of  the  cross,  it 
pretypifies.  .  .  .  This  baptism  is  his  anoint- 
ing to  that  sacrifice  for  sinners  which  now  first 
properly  begins.  He  afterwards  was  baptized 
with  the  baptism  of  death,  in  which  he,  as  the 
Lamb  of  God,  bore  our  guilt."  So,  also,  Bengal 
says  :  "  He  not  onl}^  undertook,  when  he  came  to 
baptism,  the  task  of  fulfilling  all  righteousness 
(^Latt.  iii.  15),  but  he  also  completed  it  by  pouring 
out  Jiis  bloody 

There  is  nothing  in  the  narrative  of  the  bap- 
tism of  Jesus  by  John  that  can  determine  its  mode. 
Neither  the  current  use  of  the  Greek  word  bap- 
tizo  in  the  days  of  John,  nor  the  use  of  the  Greek 
preposition  in  its  correct  construction,  affords  any 
evidence  for  the  theory  that  the  baptism  was  per- 
formed by  dipping  the  person  into  tlie  water. 
Undoubtedly  it  was  performed  in  the  usual  mode. 
The  turn  which  Dr.  Carson  gives  to  IMark  i.  9  is 
fully  considered  by  Dr.  Dale  in  "  Johannic  Bap- 


TJic  Baptism  of  Jesus.  221 

tisra,"  pp.  375-405,  and  shown  to  be  at  variance 
with  the  true  construction  of  the  Greek  idiom. 
(See  also  "  C.  and  P.  B.,"  p.  425.)  The  facts  are 
nan-ated  by  Matthew,  iii.  13,  thus  :  "  Then  cometh 
Jesus  from  Galilee  to  Jordan  unto  John,  to  be 
baptized  of  him."  To  this  the  statement  in  Mark 
i.  9,  translated  as  the  true  construction  requires, 
corresponds:  "  Jesus  came  from  Nazareth  of  Ga- 
lilee to  the  Jordan,  and  was  baptized  b}'  John  " 
(Dale,  p.  377).  The  word  Jordan  merely  denotes 
the  locality  of  the  baptism. 

Much  is  said  by  some  of  the  baptism  of  Jesus 
as  an  example  to  us.  But  the  baptism  of  Jesus 
was  not  designed  as  a  model  for  us.  It  was  his  in- 
duction into  his  Messianic  office  as  our  Redeemer. 
It  is  in  this  light  that  we  derive  from  it  the  in- 
structi(3n  which  it  was  intended  to  convey 

THE   BAPTISM   OF  JESUS   BY   THE   HOLY   GHOST. 

The  baptismal  rite  by  which  Jesus  was  in- 
ducted into  his  office  at  the  river  Jordan  was 
attended  by  a  more  divine  baptism.  "  Jesus  also 
being  baptized,  and  pra3'ing,  the  heaven  was  open- 
ed, and  the  Holy  Ghost  descended  .  .  .  upon 
him."  The  Spirit  assumed  a  visible  form  like  a 
dove,  and  was  seen  by  Jesus  gliding  with  gentle 
motion  down  from  the  skies,     "  And  he  saw  the 


2  2  2     The  Meaning  and  Ptnue?'  of  Baptism. 

Spirit  of  God  descending  like  a  dove,  and  liglit- 
ing  upon  hiin."  John  also  was  a  witness  of  the 
descent  of  the  Spirit.  "  I  saw  the  Spirit  de- 
scending from  heaven,  and  it  abode  upon  him." 
This  descent  of  the  Spirit  was  the  divinely-ap- 
pointed sign  by  which  the  Baptist  was  to  know 
that  Jesus  was  the  Messiah.  "  He  that  sent  me  to 
baptize  with  water,  the  same  said  unto  me,  Upon 
whom  thou  shalt  see  the  Spirit  descending,  and 
remaining  on  him,  the  same  is  he  which  baptizeth 
with  the  Hol}^  Ghost."  Thus,  as  Lange  says: 
"At  his  baptism  he  was  baptized  with  the  Holy 
Ghost."  For  although  "  tlie  term  baptism  is  not 
immediately  applied  to  this  transaction,"  says 
Dale,  "  it  is  ver}^  clearly  involved  in  the  words  " 
of  John  ;  for  the  expression,  "  the  same  is  he  which 
baptizeth  with  the  Holy  Ghost,"  denotes  an 
agency  which  "  is  predicated  on  the  previous  per- 
sonal baptism  of  our  Lord  by  the  Holy  Ghost " 

(P-  30- 

The  need  which  Jesus  had  of  the  bnptism  of 

the  Spirit  arose  from  the  human  conditions  under 

which  he  must  perform  the  work  which  he  had 

undertaken.     In  his  own   unique  personality  he 

united  the  divine  and   human  natures.     There  is 

that  in  the  Incarnation,  as  well  as  in  the  Trinity, 

which    bafiles    every   effort   to   understand.     But 


The  J3  apt  ism  cf  Jcsjts.  223 

among  the  things  that  arc  clearly  taught  is  (he 
dependence  of  the  human  nature  of  Christ  not 
only  on  his  divine  nature  and  on  the  Father,  but 
on  the  Holy  Spirit.  It  has  not  ahva3'S  been  ob- 
served to  what  an  extent  the  activity  of  his 
earthly  life  is  referred  in  the  Scriptures  to  the 
H0I3"  Spirit  as  the  guiding  and  controlling  cause. 
By  his  incarnation  he  became  subject  to  all  the 
conditions  of  luimanity  in  its  sinless  state.  An 
essential  part  of  his  mission  was  "to  present  to 
the  world  a  peiiect  model  of  man  in  his  true  re- 
lations to  God."  As  the  model  man,  exemplify- 
ing all  that  man  is  in  his  pure  humanity,  he  was 
dependent  upon  the  Holy  Spirit;  and  in  his 
whole  earthly  life  '*  he  was  inspired,  directed, 
controlled,  in  thought  and  i'ecling,  and  word  and 
action,  by  the  Spirit  of  God  "  (''  Bib.  Sac,"  Vol. 
XXXI.  p.  619). 

This  involves  all  the  essential  elements  of  a 
baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  He  lived  and 
acted  under  the  controlling  influence  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  from  the  time  of  his  baptism  by  John. 
Thus  Luke  sa3's  :  "  Jesus  being  fall  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  returned  from  Jordan,  and  was  led  b}-  the 
Spirit  into  the  wilderness."  The  complete  control 
ot  the  H0I3'  Spirit  over  him  is  seen  in  the  strong 
language  of  Mark  ;  "  And  immediately  the  Spirit 


2  24     ^^^^  Jllca  n  inq^  a nd  Po'u  r ;'  of  Baptism. 

drivetli  him  into  the  wilderness."  The  Spirit 
powerfully  bore  him  along,  yet  with  the  tiill 
consent  of  his  will.  After  he  had  vanquished  the 
tempter,  "Jesus  returned  in  the  power  of  the 
Spirit  into  Galilee."  The  divine  quality  of  his 
teaching- is  attributed  to  the  same  source:  "For 
he  whom  God  hath  sent  speaketh  the  words  ot 
God  ;  for  God  giveth  not  the  Spirit  bv  measure 
unto  him." 

This  baptism  was  unlimited  in  continuance  as 
well  as  in  measure.  It  was  a  lifedong  baptism. 
The  Spirit,  lilce  a  dove,  not  only  "lighted  upon 
him,"  but  "  it  abode  upon  him,"  as  John  says,  "  de- 
scending and  remaining  on  him."  It  was  a  per- 
manent influence.  Jesus  continued  "in  this  con- 
dition of  baptism  during  all  the  period  in  which 
he  was  engaged  in  accomplishing  his  covenant  to 
'fulfil  all  righteousness.'"  B}'  this  influence  he 
was  endued  with  power  in  his  preaching.  "The 
Spirit  of  the  Lord  is  upon  me,  because  he  hath 
anointed  me  to  preach  the  Gospel  to  the  poor, 
.  .  .to  preach  the  acceptable  year  of  the  Lord" 
(Luke  iv.  i8).  This  was  promised  in  the  prophe- 
tic word  :  "  And  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  shall  rest 
upon  him,  the  spirit  of  wisdom  and  understanding, 
the  spirit  of  counsel  and  might,  the  spirit  of  know- 
ledge and   the   fear  of  the  Lord,  and   shall  make 


TJie  Baptism  of  Jesus.  225 

him  quick'  of  understanding  "  (Isa.  xi.  2,  3),  The 
r.iiracles  of  Jesus  were  wrought  by  the  power  of 
the  Spirit  :  "  If  I  by  the  Spirit  of  God  cast  ()ut 
devils."  It  was  through  the  Spii'it  that  he  offered 
up  himself  as  the  Lamb  of  God  to  make  atone- 
ment:  "  Who,  through  the  Eternal  Spirit,  offered 
himself  without  spot  to  God"  (Ileb.  ix.  14). 
"  This  offering  was  the  conatimmation  of  that  co- 
venant assumed  at  iiis  baptism  by  John,  when  he 
engaged  to  fidfil  all  righteousness"  (Dale,  p.  32). 

The  Son  of  God,  in  his  divine  nature,  had  infi- 
nite all-suflncienc}'  in  himself.  But  of  his  own  will 
as  God  he  assumed  human  nature,  and  in  his 
human  condition  he  came  under  the  limitations  of 
humanity.  The  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit  upon 
his  human  faculties  was  an  essential  condition  of 
the  accomplishment  of  his  great  undertaking  as 
the  Messiali.  This  endowment  of  Christ  by  the 
Holy  Ghost  for  his  peculiar  work  is  declared  by 
Peter  :  "  God  anointed  Jesus  of  Nazareth  with  the 
Holy  Ghost  and  with  power  :  who  went  about 
doing  good,  and  healing  all  that  were  oppressed 
of  the  devil  ;  for  God  was  with  him  "  (Acts  x.  3S). 

THE   BAPTISM   OF   JESUS   ON   THE   CROSS. 

Luke  xii.  50  :  "I  have  a  baptism  to  be  baptized 
with." 


2  26     The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

Matthew  xx.  22  :  "  Are  36  able  to  drink  of  the 
cup  that  I  shall  drink  of?  " 

jNIark  x.  38  :  "  Can  yc  drink  of  the  cup  that  I 
drink  of?  and  be  baptized  with  the  baptism  that  I 
am  baptized  with  ?" 

The  announcement  in  Luke  of  this  baptism  of 
Jesus  was  made  just  after  the  second  Passover 
following  his  baj^tism  by  John,  The  second  allu- 
sion to  it,  in  the  enquiry  put  to  the  two  sons  of 
Zebedee  which  Matthew  and  Mark  record,  was 
made  a  few  days  previous  to  the  fourth  Passover, 
just  before  his  crucihxion.  The  words  in  the 
second  part  of  the  enquiry,  and  of  the  declara- 
tion in  reply  to  the  response  of  the  disciples,  as 
given  by  Mark,  are  omitted  by  Matthew  in  Tis- 
chendorf's  New  Testament  (1873).  Lange  also 
("  Matthew,"  p.  362)  says  tiiat  "  the  words"  omit- 
ted b}'  Tischendorf  "  are  wanting  in  the  manu- 
scripts B,  D,  L,  Z,  and  in  the  Sinaitic  manu- 
script, and  in  many  ancient  versions,  and  in  all 
critical  editions.  They  were  in  all  probability  in- 
serted from  the  parallel  passages  in  Mark  x.  38, 
39."  According  to  the  genuine  original,  Matthew 
speaks  only  of  the  cup  which  Jesus  must  drink  ; 
Luke  speaks  only  of  the  baptism  which  he  must 
receive  ;  Mark  speaks  of  the  cup  and  the  bap- 
tism, which  sustain  to  each  other  the  relation  of 


The  Baptism  of  Jesiis.  227 

cause  and  effect.  By  drinking  the  cup  of  suffer- 
ing Jesus  was  baptized  into  death.  Tlie  suffer- 
ings which  he  endured  are  figuratively  repre- 
sented by  the  cup  which  he  drank.  The  contents 
of  this  cup  of  woe  contained  the  baptizing  agency 
which  had  power  to  cause  a  baptism  into  death. 
"  The  word,"  says  Dale,  "  is  used  in  its  well-un- 
derstood secondary  meanirg,  expressive  of  con- 
trolling influence."  The  result  upon  Jesus  of 
drinking  this  cup  was  death.  "  As  he  drinks  he 
dies,  .  .  .  baptized  into  penal  death,  a  '  ransom  for 
many  '  "  (''  The  Cup  and  the  Cross,"  p.  20). 

A  very  different  but  unsatisfactory  explanation 
is  given  of  this  baptism  b}'  those  who  deny  that 
baptizo  has  a  secondary  meaning.  Dr.  Carson 
(p.  117)  makes  an  unsuccessful  effort  to  separate 
the  cup  from  the  baptism,  making  them  both 
"  figures  as  independent  and  as  distinct  as  if  one 
of  them  was  found  in  Genesis  and  the  other  in 
Revelation."  He  says  they  both  represent  "  the 
sufferings  of  Christ" — one  as  "a  cup,"  the  other 
"  as  an  immersion  in  water."  But  there  is  only 
one  metaphor — the  cup  ;  and  this  is  both  a  suitable 
and  a  sufficient  emblem  of  the  sufferings  of  Jesus. 
To  represent  the  same  idea  under  the  additional 
figure  of  immersing  him  in  water  is  wholly  incon- 
gruous and  superfluous.     There  is  no  reason  for 


2  28  ■'  The  Mcani)i(^  and  Pinver  of  Baptism. 

so  interpretir.g  it,  except  in  the  exigency  of  iiu 
erroneous  theory/  of  the  signification  of  the  word. 
Dr.  Carson  thinks  that  he  must  interpret  the  word 
in  conformity  with  his  theory  "  tJiat  it  always  sig- 
nifies to  dip,  neve?'  expressing  anytJiiiig  Init  mode."'' 
But  the  mere  act  of  dipping  a  person  in  water — a 
momentar}-  act  of  slight  and  trivial  influence — is 
incompetent  to  express  intense  suffering.  Dr. 
Carson  shifts  the  word  and  substitutes  the  am- 
biguous word  immerse  ;  and  passages  of  a  highly 
poetic  nature  are  quoted  by  him  and  others  which 
speak  of  "floods,"  and  "  waves,"  and  "  billows," 
and  "  water-spouts."  But  such  outbursts  of  the 
imagination  do  not  harmonize  with  the  sober  his- 
toric style  of  the  record  which  we  have  in  the 
nan-ative  of  the  Crucifixion,  and  they  are  especial- 
ly incongruous  by  the  side  of  the  beautiful  and 
well-chosen  metaphor  b}^  which  Jesus  so  often 
represents  the  atoning  sufferings  of  his  approach- 
ing death  as  "  the  cup "  which  his  Father  had 
given  him  to  drink.  There  is  not  a  single  circum- 
stance in  the  narrative  which  suggests  a  water 
scene,  and  the  picture  of  an  overwhelming  flood 
in  tliis  place  is  onlv  an  exercise  of  the  human 
fancy.  The  secondar}-  meaning  of  baptizo,  ex- 
pressive of  controlling  influence,  gives  full  signifi- 
cance to  the  cup.     A  baptism  alwavs  corresponds 


The  Baptis7it  of  yesus.  21c) 

in  its  nature  to  the  character  of  the  baptizing 
poiver.  The  cup  which  Jesus  drank,  Irom  the 
ver}^  nature  of  its  contents,  had  power  to  cause 
his  death.  It  was  a  cup  filled  with  atoning  suf- 
ferings. He  drank  the  cup,  and  was  baptized 
into  atoning  death. 

It  is  not  the  mode  of  baptism  which  gives  im- 
portance to  the  right  interpretation  of  this  passage. 
The  baptism  of  Calvary  derives  its  importance 
from  its  character  and  from  its  central  position 
among  Bible  baptisms.  "  The  baptism  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  on  the  cross  is  tliat  wondrous  cen- 
tral baptism  in  which  all  other  baptisms  of  tlie 
Bible,  whether  type  or  symbol  or  equivalent  bap- 
tisms, meet  "  (Dale,  p.  42). 

This  baptism  of  Jesus  was  a  death-baptism, 
caused  b}'  drinking  the  cup  of  suffering  which 
was  given  to  him.  In  prospect  of  this  baptism 
he  uttered  an  exclamation  of  distress:  "  I  have  a 
baptism  to  be  baptized  with  ;  and  how  am  I  strait- 
ened till  it  be  accomplished!"  His  question  to 
the  two  disciples:  "Are  ye  able  to  drink  of  the 
cup  that  I  shall  drink  of?"  plainly  shows  that  it 
was  a  cup  of  suffering.  The  suffering  is  involved 
in  both  the  cup  and  the  baptism.  The  baptism 
is  the  result  of  th.e  drinking  of  the  cup.  Mark 
conjoins  the  two  as  cause  and   effect:   "Can  ye 


230    The  Afeanuig  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

drink  of  the  cup  that  I  drink  cm"  ?  and  be  baptized 
with  the  baptism  that  I  am  baptized  with?"  The 
one  follows  the  other.  In  direct  connection  with 
this  baptism,  both  in  Matthew  and  jNIadc,  Jesus 
speaks  of  his  death:  "  Behold,  we  ^^o  up  to  Jeru- 
salem ;  and  the  Son  of  Man  shall  be  delivered 
unto  the  chief  j)riests,  and  unto  the  scribes;  and 
they  shall  condemn  him  to  dcatJi,  and  shall  deliver 
him  to  the  Gentiles:  and  they  shall  m.ock  him, 
and  shall  scourge  him,  arid  shall  spit  upon  him, 
and  shall  kill  /liin.'"  So  in  the  further  context  of 
Matthew  :"  The  Son  of  Man  came  .  .  ,  to  give  his 
life  a  ransom  for  many." 

The  word  baptizo  by  frequent  usage  is  competent 
to  express  the  idea  of  putting  to  death.  "  The 
dolphin  baptizing  killed  him  "  (/Esop).  "  I,  bap- 
tizing 3-ou  b}-  sea-waves,  v.'ill  destroy  )'ou  "  (Alcibi- 
ades).  "  Baptizing  others  into  the  lake,"  DROWNED 
them  (Heliodorus).  "Baptizing  him,"  DROWNED 
him  (Lucian).  "  Whom  it  were  better  to  baptize," 
to  DROWN  (Tiiemistius).  The  word  baptisiiia  (bap- 
tism) is  a  noun  which,  from  its  Greek  formation, 
expresses  condition.  As  the  action  expressed  by 
the  verb  baptizo  is  capable  of  producing  death, 
so  the  noun  baptisma  is  capable  of  expressing  the 
condition  of  death  ;  and  this  is  the  signification 
which  its  connection  in  this  place  requires. 


The  Baptism  of  Jesus.  231 

This  baptism  is  caused  by  drinking  from  a  cup. 
Cup-baptisms  are  among  the  most  frequent  bap- 
tisms spoken  of  by  Greek  writers,  "  Baptisms 
by  drinking  are  various  in  cliaracter,  yet  all 
marked  by  a  thorough  change  of  condition,  pervaded 
and  controlled  by  the  CHARACTERISTIC  of  the  baptis- 
ing liquid.  No  liquid  which  cannot  thoroughly 
change  tlie  condition  of  the  drinker,  and  subject 
him  to  its  characteristic  qualit}',  is  capable  of 
baptizing  "  ("  C.  and  P.  B.,"  p.  47),  A  cup  filled 
with  an  opiate  baptizes  into  ^////^'r.  "  Whom,  by 
the  same  drug,  havdng  baptized,"  by  drinking 
from  a  cup  (Achilles  Tatiusj.  A  cup  filled  with 
wine  commimicates  its  intoxicating  quality  to 
the  drinker.  "  Baptized  by  unmixed  wine,"  by 
drinking  from  a  cup  (Athenasus).  "  Baptizing 
powerfully,"  b}'  drinking  from  a  cup  (Athen^us). 
"  Baptized  Alexander,"  by  drinking  from  a  cup 
(Conon).  "  Resembles  one  baptized,"  by  drink- 
ing from  a  cup  (Lucian).  "  Baptized  yesterday," 
by  drinking  from  a  cup  (Plato).  "  Baptizing, 
drank  to  one  another,"  by  drinking  from  a  cup 
(Plutarch).  "  Baptized  by  yesterday's  debauch," 
by  drinking  from  a  cup  (Plutarch).  "  A  body 
not  baptized,"  by  drinking  from  a  cup  (Plutarch). 
"  The  body  not  yet  baptized,"  by  drinking  from 
a  cup  (Plutarch).     "  The  character  of  these  bap- 


232    The  Meaning  and  Poiuer  of  Baptism. 

tisms  differs  according  to  the  distinctive  cha- 
racter of  the  contents  of  the  cup.  ...  In  every 
case  there  is  a  powerful,  penetrating-,  pervading, 
and  assimilating  influence  controlling  and  tho- 
roiighl}'  changing  the  condition  of  the  drinker. 
//  is  this  RESULT  zi'hich  makes  the  BAPTISM.  The 
specialt}'  of  the  inlluence  individualizes  the  bap- 
tism. The  cup  which  the  Saviour  drank  was 
filled  with  such  contents  as  no  other  cup  had 
ever  been  filled  with.  It  was  not  filled  with  the 
woes  of  simple  death,  but  with  penal  and  atoning 
death  ;  THEREFORE  the  baptism  consequent  upon 
the  drinking  was  such  as  never  had  been  and 
never  shall  be  "  ("  The  Cup  and  the  Cross,"  p.  22). 
Jesus  had  not  yet  drunk  the  cup  while  in  the 
garden  of  Gethsemane.  His  agon}'  in  the 
garden  was  in  view  of  the  prospect  that  rose  be- 
foi'c  him.  "  ()  ni}-  Father!  if  it  be  possible,  let 
this  cup  pass  from  me  :  nevertheless  not  as  I 
will,  but  as  thou  wilt  "  (Matt.  xxvi.  39).  ''  O  my 
Father  !  if  this  cup  raav  not  pass  from  me,  except 
I  drink  it,  thy  will  be  done  "  (v.  42). 

"  Abba,  Father,  all  things  are  possible  unto 
thee;  take  away  this  cup  from  me:  nevertheless 
not  what  I  will,  but  what  thou  wilt"  (Mark  xiv. 
36).  "Father,  if  thou  be  willing,  remove  this 
cup    from    mc :    nevertheless    not    mv    will,    but 


The  Baptism  of  Jesus.  233 

thine,  be  done  "  (Luke  xxii.  42).  At  a  later  hour, 
after  his  visit  by  the  ministering  angxl,  and  after 
his  arrest  by  the  band  of  Jews,  the  cup  was  yet 
to  be  drunk.  "  The  cup  which  my  Father  hath 
given  me,  shall  I  not  drink  it?  "  (John  xvaii.  11). 

"This  baptism  of  our  Lord  is  the  only  baptism 
of  the  New  Testament  which  is  represented  as 
eftected  by  drinking'  from  a  cup.  There  is  no 
other  baptism  which  could  fitly  be  so  represented. 
This  baptism  stands  all  alone.  It  was  no  ordi- 
nary death-baptism  ;  it  was  no  martyr  death-bap- 
tism ;  it  was  an  atoning  death-baptism  "  ("  C.  and 
P.  B.,"  p.  49). 

The  Patrists  identify  the  cup  which  Jesus 
drank  with  his  baptism  of  blood  in  his  death  on 
the  cross. 

1.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  :  "  For  the  Saviour  called 
martyrdom  baptism,  saN-ing:  'Can  ye  drink  the 
cup  that  \  drink?'  "  (p.  39). 

2.  Origen :  "  The  baptism  of  martyrdom  is 
given  to  us  ;  for  so  it  is  called,  as  is  evident  :  '  Can 
ye  drink  the  cup  which  I  drink?  '  or  '  Be  baptized 
with  the  baptism  that  I  am  baptized  with  ?  '  "  (p, 

42). 

3.  Chrysostom  :  "  Here  calling  his  cross  and 
death  a  cup  and  a  baptism  "  (Conant,  p.  129). 

4.  Petilianus :    "Ye    make    martyrs    like    unto 


2  34    ^^^^  Meaning  and  Powey  of  Baptism. 

Christ  whom  baptizing   biood    sprinkles"  (Dale, 
p.  40). 

The  baptismal  virtue  is  in  the  quality  of  the 
baptizing  agency,  not  in  its  mode  of  application. 

5.  John  of  Damascus,  after  describing  six  bap- 
tisms, says:  "Seventh,  that  which  is  by  blood 
and  martyrdom,  with  which  Christ  himself  was 
for  us  baptized,  as  exceedingly  august  and 
blessed  "  (Conant,  p.  131). 

6.  Cyprian:  "  Baptized  by  that  most  illustrious 
and  greatest  baptism  of  blood  concerning  which 
the  Lord  said  that  he  had  another  baptism  to  be 
baptized  with"  (Dale,  p.  39). 

7.  Origen  :  "  Chrisr,  whom  we  follow,  shed  his 
blood  for  our  redemption,  that  we  may  depart 
washed  by  our  own  blood.  For  it  is  the  baptism 
ot  blood  only  which  can  make  us  more  pure  than 
the  baptism  of  water  has  made  us.  And  this  I  do 
not  assume,  but  the  Scripture  declares,  the  Lord 
saying  to  his  disciples  :  '  1  have  a  baptism  to  be 
baptized  with  that  ye  \\\o\\  not  of.  And  how  am 
1  straitened  until  it  be  accomplished  I  '  Vou  see,  • 
therefore,  that  he  called  the  shedding  of  his 
blood  baptism  "  (p.  41). 

8.  Theophylact :  "  He  calls  liis  death  a  baptism, 
as  being  a  purihcation  for  us  all"  (Crcraer,  p. 
105). 


CHAPTER  XI. 

THE   BAPTISM   OF   THE   HOLY   GHOST. 

A  CTS  i.  5  :  "  For  John  truly  baptized  with 
"^^  water;  but  yc  shall  be  baptized  with  the 
Holy  Ghost  not  many  days  hence." 

The  baptism  of  Calvary  was  the  consummation 
of  that  redemptive  work  to  which  Jesus  con- 
secrated himsell  in  his  covenant-baptism  at  the 
Jordan.  Baptized  into  atoning  death,  rising  from 
that  death  to  a  life  immortal,  and  just  ready  to 
ascend  to  the  right  hand  of  God  above,  he  re- 
newed the  great  promise  of  the  new  dispensation 
as  a  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  This  word,  by  its 
remarkable  history  and  the  significance  which  it 
had  attained  by  the  laws  of  language  development, 
was  fitted  to  be  the  chosen  term  to  express  the  re- 
sult of  the  various  operations  of  the  Holy  Spiiit 
on  the  human  soul.  In  the  whole  range  of  its 
varied  usage  it  is  a  word  of  power ;  and  in  its 
spiritual  import,  selected  as  it  is  by  inspiration  to 
denote  the  highest  forms  of  blessedness  which  the 
Redeemer  confers  upon  man  b}^  his  own  personal 
work  and  by  tlie  work  of  his  Spirit,  it  is  suited  to 

'35 


236    The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

convev  instruction  freighted  with  spiritu.il  effi- 
cacy. The  baptism  of  the  cross  is  the  source 
from  wlience  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
emanates.  Jesus,  having-  accompHshed  by  his 
death  that  atoning  baptism  which  was  essential 
in  order  to  procure  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
now  makes  the  announcement  that  this  baptism 
shall  soon  be  given  to  his  waiting  disciples. 

Without  making  attempt  to  develop  this  sub- 
ject in  full,  we  will  present  the  following  points 
for  consideration  : 

I.  The  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost  was  tJie  pro- 
mise of  the  FatJicr  which  Jesus  gave  to  his  dis- 
ciples. 

Jesus  thus  identifies  the  baptism  with  the  pro- 
raise  :  "  Wait  for  the  promise  of  the  Father,  which, 
saith  he,  36  have  heard  of  me.  For  John  truly 
hfiptized  with  water;  but  ye  shall  be  baptized 
with  the  Holy  Ghost.  .  .  .  Vc  shall  receive 
power,  after  that  the  Holy  Ghost  is  come  upon 
you  "  (Acts  i.  4,  5,  8).  Of  this  promise,  which,  as 
Jesus  reminds  them,  they  had  "heard"  at  a  pre-' 
vious  interview,  Luke  (xxiv.  49)  thus  makes  re- 
cord :  "And  behold,  I  send  the  promise  of  my 
Father  upon  you  :  but  tarry  vc  in  the  city  of 
Jerusalem,  until  ye  be  endued  with  power  from 
on  high."     Before  the  Crucifixion,  our  Lord  had 


The  Baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost.       237 

promised  that  the  Father  would  send  the  Holy 
Ghost  in  his  name  (John  xiv.  16,  26,  xv.  26)  ;  and 
the  same  pz'omise  had  been  given  in  Messianic 
prophecy,  in  which,  as  Peter  declares,  the  baptism 
of  Pentecost  had  been  foretold :  "  This  is  that 
which  was  spoken  by  the  prophet  Joel:  And  it 
shall  come  to  pass  in  the  last  days,  saith  God,  I 
will  pour  out  of  my  Spirit  upon  all  flesh  "  (Acts  ii. 
16,  17),  All  the  wealth  of  blessedness  wliich  there 
is  in  the  promise  of  the  Spirit,  as  given  in  the 
glowing  language  of  the  Hebrew  prophets,  in  the 
simple  but  expressive  words  of  Jesus,  and  in  the 
allusions  to  it  by  the  apostles,  is  embodied  in  the 
baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  It  is  the  great  pro- 
mise of  the  Messianic  dispensation. 

2.  The  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  under  the 
dispensation  of  the  Lord  Jesns  Christ.  The  admin- 
istration of  the  whole  work  of  redemption  is  com- 
mitted to  him  as  the  Mediator.  An  essential 
part  of  that  work  is  accomplished  by  the  agency 
of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Jesus  sends  the  Holy  Ghost 
and  baptizes  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  Jesus  never 
administered  ritual  baptism.  That  work,  which 
was  merely  S3'mbolical,  he  committed  to  his  dis- 
ciples. But  the  great  and  essential  work  of 
changing  the  spiritual  condition  of  the  soul  he 
himself  accomplishes  through  the  agency  of  the 


238    The  Meaning A^id  Power  of  Baptism. 

Holy  Ghost.  Matt.  iii.  ii:  "He  that  cometh 
after  me  is  mig-htier  than  I.  .  .  .  He  shall  baptize 
you  with  the  Holy  Ghost."  Mark  i.  8:  "He 
shall  baptize  you  with  the  Holy  Ghost."  So  in 
Luke  iii.  16:  ''He  shall  baptize  you  wich  the 
Holy  Ghost"  ;  and  in  John  i.  33:  "  Upon  whom 
thou  shalt  see  the  Spirit  descendiug-,  and  remain- 
ing on  him,  the  same  is  he  which  baptizeth  with 
the  Holy  Ghost." 

This  is  the  great  declaration  which  Jesus  re- 
cognizes and  appropriates  to  himself  in  his  inter- 
view with  his  disciples  before  the  Ascension.  He 
himself,  in  giving  the  promise  (John  xiv.  26), 
speaks  of  "  the  Holy  Ghost,  whom  the  Father 
will  send  in  my  name";  and  (xv.  26)  "whom  I 
will  send  unto  you  from  the  Father,  even  the 
Spirit  of  truth."  When,  after  his  ascension,  he 
began  to'  dispense  the  Spirit  in  the  pentecostal 
baptism,  Peter  says  :  "  Being  by  the  right  hand 
of  God  exalted,  and  having  received  of  the  Fa- 
ther the  promise  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  he  hath  shed 
forth  this,  which  ye  now  see  and  hear"  (Acts  ii.- 
33),  So  Paul  (Tit.  iii.  5,  6)  speaks  of  the  "  renew- 
ing of  the  Holy  Ghost,  which  he  shed  on  us 
abundantly  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Saviour." 
Jesus  Christ  was  qualified  to  administer  this  bap- 
tism;  for  he  was  himself  baptized  by   the  Holy 


The  B dpi i sin  of  the  Holy  Ghost.       239 

Ghost  "  descending,  and  remaining  on  hiin,"  and 
was  thus  invested,  "  witlioiit  measure,"  with  those 
spiritual  endowments  which  qualified  him  for 
every  part  of  his  mediatorial  work.  The  work 
ot  dispensing-  the  H0I3'  Ghost  is  one  of  transcen- 
dent importance,  and  for  this  part  of  his  work 
Jesus  was  full}'  endued.  The  declaration  in  John 
i.  33  :  "  The  same  is  he  which  baptizeth  with  the 
Holy  Ghost,"  in  its  true  interpretation,  repre- 
sents Jesus  as  "  the  Baptizer  who  was  himself  in 
the  Holy  Ghost,  and,  being-  in  the  Holy  Ghost, 
was  thereb}^  invested  with  power  to  baptize  by 
the  Holy  Ghost"  ("  C.  and  P.  B.,"  p.  53).  Am- 
brose calls  Jesus  "the  Great  Baptizer."  He  is 
the  baptizer  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  He  is  the  dis- 
penser of  this  gift. 

3.  In  effecting  this  baptism  the  Holy  Ghost  is 
the  divine,  personal  agent.  "  Ye  shall  be  baptized 
/;/  the  Holy  Ghost"  (Dale,  p.  'ji).  The  Holy 
Ghost  is  not  the  local  sphere  or  passive  medium 
in  which  this  baptism  takes  place,  but  the  person 
by  tvhose  agency  the  baptism  is  effected.  In  the 
places  that  speak  of  the  baptism  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  the  Greek  preposition  ey  is  used,  and 
some  translate  "  in  the  Holy  Ghost."  But  the 
preposition  in  this  relation  is  not  used  in  its  pri- 
mary   physical  and   local    signiftcation,   denoting 


240    The  Meaning  and  Poiver  of  Baptism. 

"  an  expanse  zoitJi'ui  the  bjimds  of  zvhieh  anything 
exists"  (Winer,  p.  3S4).  The  Holy  Ghost  is  not 
"  the  element  in  or  within  which  the  act  is  per- 
formed "  (Conant,  p.  100).  The  theor}^  which 
demands  the  transUition  "  immersed  in  the  Holy 
Ghost  "  limits  the  Greek  preposition  to  its  local 
signihcation,  and  denies  that  it  can  denote  agen- 
cy. Dr.  Conant  says  the  word  baptizo  in  Acts  i. 
5  and  elsewhere  is  "construed  with  the  local  pre- 
position ill.''  Dr.  Carson  (p.  107)  says:  "The 
disciples  were  immersed  mto  the  H(jly  Spirit." 
This  results  from  the  error  of  making-  the  Holy 
Spirit  the  receptive  clement,  thus  excluding  his 
personal  agency  in  the  baptism. 

That  the  Greek  preposition  has  not  only  a 
local  but  an  instrumental  signification  was  suffi- 
ciently shown  in  a  previous  chapter.  There  is 
also  abundant  evidence  that  it  denotes  agencv 
and  influence  in  its  usage  in  conn.ection  with  the 
Holy  Spirit. 

Micah  iii.  8  :  "  1  am  full  of  power  bj'  the  Spirit 
of  the  Lord." 

Zech.  iv.  6 :  "  Not  by  might,  nor  b}'  power,  but 
by  my  Spirit,  saith  the  Lord." 

Neh.  ix.  30:  "By  thy  Spirit  in  the  prophets.' 

Mark  xii.  36:  "  David  himself  said  by  the  Holy 
Ghost  "  :  which  means,  as  Robinson  ("N.  T.  Lex.," 


The  Baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost.        241 

p.  248)  sa3-s,  "  Under  the  power  and  influence  of 
the  Hoi}'  Spirit." 

Matthew  xxii.  43  :  "  How  then  doth  David  in 
spirit  call  him  Lord?"  Buttmann  explains  this, 
**  Impelled  by  the  Spirit."  This  eminent  scholar 
says  that  the  Greek  "  preposition  tv  is  very  com- 
monly used  ...  to  designate  the  means;  and 
that  not  only  with  things  (equiv.  to  the  instru- 
mental dative),  but  also  with  persons"  ("Gram, 
of  the  N.  T.,"  p.  329). 

Luke  ii.  27:  "And  he  came  by  the  Spirit  into 
the  Temple  " — i.c.^  led  by  the  Spirit. 

Luke  iv.  i  :  "  Jesus  being  full  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  .  .  .  was  led  by  the  Spirit  into  the  wilder- 
ness." 

Matthew  ix.  34 :  "  He  casteth  out  devils  through 
the  prince  of  the  devils."  Winer  gives  this  as  an 
example  of  the  instrumental  use  of  this  preposi- 
tion with  the  dative,  and  says:  "  F,v  is  so  used 
with  personal  designations  "  ("  N.  T.  Gr.,"  p.  388). 

Matthew  xii.  27  :  "  If  I  by  Beelzebub  cast  out 
devils  "  ;  xii.  28,  "  But  if  I  cast  out  devils  by  the 
Spirit  of  God." 

Rom,  XV.  13:  "That  ye  may  abound  in  hope, 
througJi  the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost." 

Rom.  XV.  16:  "Sanctified  by  the  Holy 
Ghost." 


242     The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

I    Cor.  xii.  9  :  "  To  another  faith  by  the  same 
Spirit." 

I  Peter  i.  12  :  "  Preached  the  Gospel  unto  you 
with  the  H0I3'  Ghost  sent  down  from  heaven." 

These  examples  are  but  specimens  selected 
from  a  widely-extended  usage  in  which  the  pre- 
position denotes  the  Cj{!;cncy  of  the  person  or  ob- 
ject to  which  it  stands  related.  This  prepares  us 
for  the  direct  evidence  of  the  actual  agency  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  baptism  under  considera- 
tion. Evidence  of  the  active  energy  of  the  Spirit 
is  found  both  in  the  promise  and  in  its  fulfilment  : 
''  He  shall  teach  you  all  things  "  (John  xiv.  26). 
"  I  send  the  promise  of  ray  Father  upon  [fTri] 
you  :  but  tany  ye  in  the  city  of  Jerusalem  until 
}•€  be  endued  with  power  from  on  high  "  (Luke 
xxiv.  49).  "  Ye  shall  receive  power  after  that  the 
Holy  Ghost  is  come  upon  3^ou "  (Acts  i.  8). 
"  They  were  all  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  and 
began  to  speak  with  other  tongues  as  the  Spirit 
gave  them  utterance"  (Acts  ii.  4).  So  in  the  di- 
verse baptisms  of  the  Spirit :  "  There  are  diversi- 
ties of  gifts,  buL  the  same  Spirit.  There  are 
diversities  of  operations,  but  it  is  the  saxie  God 
which  worketh  all  in  all.  To  one  is  given  by 
the  Spirit  the  word  of  wisdom.  .  ,  .  All  these 
worketh  that  one  and  the  self-same  Spirit,  divid- 


The  Baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost.       243 

ing  to  every  man  severally  as  he  will.  For  by 
one  Spirit  we  are  all  baptized  into  one  body '^ 
(i  Cor.  xii.) 

The  Holy  Ghost  is  an  active  AGENT,  not  a 
receiving'  element  into  which  souls  are  put  by 
some  baptizer.  "  The  Baptist  view,  xvJdcJi  as- 
signs to  Christ  the  tvork  of  putting  t/ie  souls  of  men 
in  the  Holy  Ghost  as  a  quiescent  receptacle,  revolu- 
tionizes the  Gospel  scheme.  ...  It  is  not  the 
work  of  Christ  to  bring  the  souls  of  men  to  the 
Hol}^  Ghost,  but  it  is  the  work  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
to  bring  the  souls  of  men  to  Christ"  ("  Johannic 
Baptism,"  p.  178). 

The  use  of  the  Greek  preposition  in  connection 
with  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  invariable, 
while  its  use  is  variable  in  connection  with  bap- 
tism by  symbol  water.  The  reason  given  for 
this  by  Dr.  Conant,  p.  100,  is  that  "  the  Holy 
Spirit  could  less  properly  be  conceived  as  the 
mere  instrument  of  an  act."  This  concedes  that 
w^ater  is  a  "  mere  instrument,"  and  that  the  Holy 
Spirit  is  not.  This  is  true,  though  not  in  har- 
mony with  the  theory,  but  it  gives  no  explanation 
of  the  variable  use  of  the  preposition  in  connec- 
tion with  water  (see  chap.  ix.  p.  192).  Dr.  Dale 
("  C.  and  P.  B,,"  p.  yj)  gives  a  much  better  rea- 
son.     The   qualification    of  Jesus   to   administer 


244    ^^^^  Meo.niiig  ajid  Power  of  Baptism. 

the  baptism  of  the  H0I3'  Ghost  depends  on,  and 
is  derived  from,  the  Spirit.  Jesus,  therefore,  is 
always  in  the  Spirit  and  binder  his  influence.  But 
the  qualification  of  John  to  baptize  with  water 
did  not  depend  on  the  water.  The  water,  as  the 
mere  instrumental  means  of  ritual  baptism,  may, 
therefore,  either  take  or  omit  the  preposition  in 
conformity  with  the  Hebraistic  or  with  the  clas- 
sical character  of  the  style,  each  of  which  denotes 
instrumentality.  But  the  constant  relation  of 
Christ  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  in  and  remaining 
under  the  influence  of  the  Spirit,  requires  expres- 
sion in  every  reference  to  the  baptism  of  the  Holy 
Ghost. 

This  baptism  is  ascribed  both  to  Jesus  and 
the  Holy  Ghost :  to  Jesus  as  the  more  remote 
author,  to  the  Holy  Ghost  as  the  more  immedi- 
ate a;:^ent.  "  Christ  and  the  Holy  Ghost  are  not 
announced  as  two  independent  baptizers,  but  as 
most  intimately  united."  It  is  the  intimate  union 
of  these  two  Persons  with  each  other,  and  their 
mutual  relation,  from  which  the  peculiar  agency 
of  each  in  this  baptism  has  its  origin. 

4.  The  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  the  effect 
of  his  agency  in  changing  the  condition  of  the  sotd. 
There  is  no  modal  action  in  the  baptism  of  the 
Spirit.     The  modal  expression,  "  I  will  pour  out 


The  Baptisjii  of  the  Holy  Ghost.        245 

my  Spirit,"  in  the  propliecy  which  Peter  sa3-s 
had  its  fulfihrient  in  this  baptism,  is  used  meta- 
phorically. This  metaphorical  use  had  its  physi- 
cal basis  ill  a  previous  literal  use  of  water  by 
pouring  to  effect  a  baptism.  The  resemblance 
does  not  lie  between  the  modal  act  of  pouring, 
in  water-baptism,  and  the  manner  in  which  the 
Spirit  is  given  :  first,  because  baptism  does  not 
consist  in  modal  action,  but  in  condition  resulting 
from  some  competent  act  or  influence ;  second,  be- 
cause an  attempt  to  trace  such  a  resemblance 
would  tend  to  materialize  our  view  of  the  influ- 
ence of  the  Spirit.  But  the  resemblance  which 
is  the  foundation  of  the  metaphor  consists  in  the 
idea  common  to  both — viz.,  resultant  condition. 
The  baptism  which  resulted  from  pouring  water 
on  the  altar  at  Carmel  was  the  cleansing  of  the 
altar.  The  baptismal  agency  was  water,  the 
mode  of  applying  it  was  by  pouring,  but  the  bap- 
tism did  not  consist  in  the  act  of  pouring,  but  in 
the  changed  condition  of  the  altar.  The  baptism 
of  the  H0I3'  Ghost  consists  in  the  changed  con- 
dition of  the  soul.  All  baptisms  correspond  in 
their  character  to  the  characteristics  of  the  bap- 
tismal agencies  by  which  they  are  eflected. 
Baptism  is  a  change  in  the  condition  of  its 
object,  the  nature  of  the   change    being    deter- 


246    The  Meaning  and  Poivei'  of  Baptism. 

mined  by  the  nature  of  the  baptizing-  power. 
The  baptism  of  the  HcjI}-  Ghost  is  a  complete  and 
thorough  change  in  the  condition  of  tJie  soul  effected 
by  his  divine  agency.  A  person  baptized  by  the 
Holy  Ghost  comes  under  his  controlling  influ- 
ence, becomes  assimilated  to  him  in  character, 
endued  with  spiritual  power,  filled  with  heavenly 
peace  and  joy,  and  qualified  for  the  service  of  the 
Master. 

There  is  a  diversity  in  the  influences  and  oper- 
ations of  the  Spirit,  and  the  baptism  of  the  Spirit 
is  characterized  by  a  similar  diversity.  As  there 
is  a  variety  of  baptisms  elsewhere — "  very  many 
kinds  of  baptisms,"  Ambrose  says — so  there  is  a 
variety  of  baptisms  in  the  work  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  in  the  soul.  The  baptism  of  Pentecost 
was  peculiar  both  in  its  special  character  and  in 
its  emblem.  The  specialty  of  this  baptism  con- 
sisted in  qualifying  the  Apostles  for  their  mis- 
sion. All  the  qualifications  which  they  needed 
in  their  work  of  laying  the  foundations  of  Christ's 
everlasting  kingdom  were  communicated  to  them  • 
by  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  The  power 
to  speak  in  foreign  languages  was  one  of  these 
qualifications,  and  the  symbol  of  this  power  was 
the  "  cloven  tongues,"  having  a  fire-like  appear- 
ance, which  sat  upon  each  of  them.     They  also 


TJic  Baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost.        247 

received  new  light,  and  strength,  and  courage, 
and  other  elements  of  spiritual  power.  They 
were  baptized  "  into  the  POWER  of  the  apostle- 
ship,''  and  this  was  the  source  of  their  eminent 
success. 

The  baptism  of  Cornelius  and  others  by  the 
Holy  Ghost  at  C^sarea  (Acts  x.  44,  xi.  16)- 
belongs  to  the  same  class  of  baptisms  as  that 
of  Pentecost,  including  the  power  to  speak  with 
tongues.  But  there  was  a  great  difference  in  these 
two  baptisms.  "  The  baptism  at  Pentecost  was 
a  baptism  qualifying  for  the  apostleship ;  this 
baptism  was  a  baptism  qualifying  for  Christian 
life,  with  such  special  endowment  as  should  con- 
vince Peter  and  others  that  Gentiles  were  to  be 
received  even  as  Jews  into  the  Christian  Church  " 
(Dale,  p.  95).  The  miraculous  powers  conferred 
in  these  and  other  baptisms  recorded  in  the  Acts 
were  not  the  whole  nor  the  most  important  en- 
dowments bestowed  upon  the  primitive  church. 
The  pov/er  of  working  miracles  was  not  peculiar 
to  the  new  dispensation,  but  had  often  been  ex- 
ercised under  the  ancient  economy.  This  power 
was  not  conferred  upon  all,  and  it  was  with- 
drawn when  its  temporary  purpose  was  accom- 
plished. 

5.    The  baptism  of  the   Holy  Ghost  in  all  its 


248    The  J\l€aniiig  and  Poivcr  of  Dap ti sin. 

variet}^  of  blessing,  miracles  excepted,  zvas  the 
common  privilcgj  of  all  Christians.  The  baptism 
of  Pentecost  was  not  limited  to  the  apostles. 
This  baptism,  as  Peter  teaches,  was  a  fuliilment 
of  the  prophecy  in  Joel:  "  It  shall  come  to  pass 
in  the  last  days,  saith  God,  I  will  pour  out  of 
my  Spirit  upon  all  flesh:  and  your  sons  and  your 
daughters  shall  prophesy.  .  .  .  And  on  my  ser- 
vants and  on  my  handmaidens  I  will  pour  out  in 
those  days  of  m}'  Spirit."  All  the  membership 
were  to  share  in  the  promised  blessing.  Were 
they  "all  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost"  by  the 
pentccostal  baptism  ?  It  is  the  duty  and  privi- 
lege of  ail  Christians  to  "  be  filled  with  the  Spi- 
rit"  (Eph.  V.  18). 

The  promise  was  made  to  all  who  should  com- 
ply with  the  instructions  of  the  apostle:  "Ye 
shall  receive  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  For 
the  promise  is  luito  3'ou,  and  to  your  children, 
and  to  all  that  arc  afar  off,  even  as  many  as  the 
Lord  our  God  shall  call"  (Acts  ii.  3S,  39).  Of 
the  disciples  in  Antioch  of  Pisidia  the  sacred 
historian  says  :  "  And  the  disciples  were  filled 
with  joy  and  v/ith  the  Holy  Ghost"  (Acts  xiii. 
52).  In  the  tvvclfth  chapter  of  the  First  Epistle  to 
the  Corinthians,  in  which  the  apostle  treats  of  the 
diversified   opei^ations  of  the   Spirit  of  God,  he 


The  Baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost,       249 

says  :  "  The  manifestation  of  the  Spirit  is  given 
to  every  man  to  profit  withal.  .  .  .  For  by  one 
Spirit  we  are  all  baptized  into  one  body  "  (i  Cor. 
xii.  7,  13).  These  statements  include  all  regener- 
ate persons,  all  \\\\o  "  by  the  Holy  Ghost  call 
Jesus  Lord  "  (v.  3).  The  promise  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  is  not  civcn  to  the  unregenerate  :  "  Whom 
the  world  cannot  receive,  because  it  secth  him 
not,  neither  knoweth  him  "  (John  xiv.  17).  Onl)^ 
those  who  have  become  Christians  receive  this 
gift  of  promise. 

The  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  sometimes 
received  immediately  on  conversion.  A  remark- 
able and  instructive  example  is  that  of  the  late 
Rev.  Charles  G.  Finney,  described  on  p.  20  of 
his  "Autobiography."  Sometimes  there  is  an  in- 
terval after  conversion  before  the  gift  is  received. 
The  apostles  were  converted  some  time  before 
they  received  the  baptism.  The  twelve  disciples 
whom  Paul  found  at  Ephcsus  (Acts  xix.  1-7)  had 
not  received  it.  Paul's  enquiry,  "  Have  }-e  re- 
ceived the  Holy  Ghost  since  ye  believed.''"  is 
sometimes  quoted  in  support  of  the  theory  that 
the  baptism  of  the  Spirit  is  not  to  be  expected 
until  after  the  duration  of  some  interval  of  time 
from  the  period  of  conversion.  But  this  is  a  mis- 
apprehension of  Paul's  meaning.     Prof  Hackctt, 


250   The  Mean  ing  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

"  Commentary,"  p.  309,  gives  the  true  meaning: 
"  Did  ye  receive  [note  tiie  aorist]  zvhcn  ye  believed? 
The  participle  refers  to  the  same  time  as  the 
verb."  The  enquiry  implies  that  the}'  might 
have  received  the  Holy  Ghost  ivJien  they  believed. 
The  passage  in  Eph.  i.  13:  "  In  whom  also  after 
that  ye  believed,  ye  were  sealed  with  that  IIol}^ 
Spirit  of  promise,"  is  also  quoted  in  support  of 
':he  same  theory.  In  both  these  passages  we 
must  "  note  the  aorist"  participle  if  we  would  get 
the  exact  meaning.  The  use  of  the  aorist  parti- 
ciple in  the  Greek  shows  that  the  gift  of  the  Spirit 
is  conditioned  on  believing,  but  it  does  not  require 
suc'.i  an  interval  of  time  as  to  lav  the  basis  of  the 
theory  of  two  distinct  and  unlike  experiences,  a 
first  and  second  conversion.  The  baptism  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  is  sometimes  received  immediately 
on  conversion,  and  the  very  question  of  Paul  was, 
"  Did  ye  receive  the  Hoi}'  Ghost  when  ye  be- 
lieved ?"  Their  reply  shows  one  reason  why  they 
did  not:  "  We  have  not  so  much  as  heard  whe- 
ther there  be  any  Holy  Ghost."  They  had  not 
received  the  needful  instruction.  If  suitable  in- 
struction were  given  and  the  conditions  complied 
with,  the  gift  of  the  Spirit  would  more  frequently 
be  received  at  the  time  of  conversion. 

6.  The  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  promised 


The  Baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost.       251 

to  believers  in  all  generations  to  the  end  of  time. 
The  distinguishing  characteristic  of  the  Gospel 
dispensation  in  contrast  with  the  one  preceding 
is  that  it  is  "the  ministration  of  the  Spirit"  (2 
Cor.  iii.  8).  This  is  "the  glory  that  excelleth." 
The  promise  is  not  limited  to  the  primitive  age. 
"I  will  pray  the  Father,  and  he  shall  give  you 
another  Comforter,  that  he  may  abide  with  you 
for  ever"  (John  xiv.  16).  Jesus  himself  could 
only  remain  on  eartii  for  a  temporary  period. 
But  the  Holy  Ghost,  whom  Jesus  promised  to 
send  from  the  Father,  will  abide  permanently 
with  his  followers.  "Neither  pray  I  for  these 
alone,  but  for  them  also  which  shall  believe  on 
me  through  their  word  "  (xvii.  20).  "  The  last 
days,"  in  which  Peter  says  the  promise,  "  I  \\\\\ 
pour  out  of  my  Spirit  upon  all  flesh,"  shall  be 
fulfilled,  covers  the  whole  period  of  the  new  dis- 
pensation from  the  beginning  to  the  end.  Joel 
gave  the  prediction  in  the  former  days,  eight 
hundred  years  before  "  the  last  days  "  began.  In 
that  former  dispensation  the  prophet  Isaiah,  in 
prophetic  foresight  of  the  permanence  of  this 
great  Gospel  blessing,  says  (lix.  21):  "As  for  me, 
this  is  my  covenant  with  them,  saith  the  Lord  : 
My  Spirit  that  is  upon  thee,  and  m}^  words  which 
I  have  put  in  thy  mouth,  shall  not  depart  out  of 


252     The  Meaning  and  Pozucr  of  Baptism. 

thy  moLitli,  nor  out  of  the  mouth  of  th}'  seed,  nor 
out  of  the  mouth  of  thy  seed's  seed,  saith  the 
Lord,  from  henceforth  and  for  ever."  The  pro- 
mise is  to  Christians  of  this  generation,  and  will 
be  to  those  of  every  generation  to  come. 

7.  The  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  received  by 
faitJi.  "  Christ  hath  redeemed  us  .  .  .  that  we 
might  receive  the  promise  of  the  Spirit  through 
faith.  .  .  .  That  the  promise  by  faith  of  Jesus 
Christ  might  be  given  to  them  that  believe  " 
(Gal.  iii.  13,  14,  22).  This  corresponds  with  the 
promise  as  given  by  the  Lord  Jesus  in  John  vii. 
37,  3S:  '^  \\\  the  last  day,  that  great  day  of  the 
feast,  Jesus  stood  and  cried,  saying,  If  any  man 
thirst,  let  him  come  unto  me  and  drink.  He  that 
bclieveth  on  me,  as  the  Scripture  hath  said,  out 
of  his  belly  shall  flow  rivers  of  living  water." 
The  meaning  of  this  John  thus  explains  to  his 
readers:  "But  this  spake  he  of  the  Spirit,  which 
they  that  believe  on  him  should  receive:  for 
the  Holy  Ghost  was  not  yet  given;  because  that 
Jesus  was  not  3'ct  glorified."  This,  as  Tholuck 
remarks,  "designates  something  more  than  the 
comparative  avioiint  of  activit}'  and  power,  it 
denotes  a  distinction  in  the  cJiaracter  of  the  out- 
pouring "  (Owen  in  loco). 

The  baptism  of  Calvary  furnished  the  superior 


The  Baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 


2^3 


conditions  which  were  essential  to  the  baptism 
of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  its  fulness,  v^arietv,  and 
power.  The  Redeemer,  exalted,  glorified,  en- 
throned in  light  and  dominion  on  high,  sends  the 
Spirit  of  truth  into  hearts  prepared  to  receive 
him  ;  and  this  glorious  Spirit  comes  into  the  soul, 
and  to  its  admiring  view  reveals  Christ  in  his 
beauty,  in  his  love,  in  his  power  to  save,  in 
his  all-sufficient  grace.  The  Holy  Ghost  re- 
veals Christ  to  the  spiritual  apprehension  of  the 
believer— Christ  in  his  wonderful  person,  in  the 
excellency  of  his  character,  in  the  amazing  work 
of  atonement  by  which  he  secured  the  everlasting 
redemption  of  all  who  come  into  a  living  union 
with  him.  The  baptism  of  the  Spirit  gives  light, 
and  life,  and  jo}^,  and  strength  to  the  soul.  It 
gives  to  the  believer  soul-trans f or juing  views  of 
Gospel  truth,  and  thus  ejidues  hint  with  divine  and 
spiritual  poiver. 

But  no  one  can  take  in  all  Bible  truth  at  one 
view.  The  views  of  persons  v/ill  var}-  according 
to  their  capacities,  their  degrees  of  knowledge, 
the  special  truths  they  contemplate,  the  vividness 
of  their  attention,  and  the  degrees  of  their  faith. 
■'There  are  diversities  of  operations  "  also ;  and 
"  all  these  workcth  that  one  and  the  self-same 
Spirit,    dividing    to   every   man   severally  as   he 


2  54    'The  Cleaning  and  Poiuer  of  Baptism, 

will"  (i  Cor.  xii.  ii).  The  baptisms  of  the  Spirit 
are,  therefore,  diverse,  both  in  degree  and  in  the 
special  endowments  by  which  different  persons 
are  qualified  for  different  purposes  and  services. 
But  each  believer  may  receive  in  full  the  bap- 
tism which  he  especially  needs  for  his  life-work 
in  his  own  appropriate  sphere  which  an  all-wise 
Providence  has  assigned  him. 

8.  The  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  a  blessino 
to  be  sought  by  all  Christians.  There  is  reason  to 
apprehend  that  the  promise  of  the  Spirit  is  not 
prized  b}'  many  according  to  its  value  ;  by  some 
not  eveji  understood.  The  regeneration  of  the 
soul  by  the  Spirit  of  God  is  not  the  whole  of  his 
^vork:.  There  arc  "  exceeding  great  and  precious 
promises  "  to  the  believer  which  he  is  expected 
to  appreciate  and  seek  for  as  taught  in  the  Scrip- 
tures. The  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  has  always 
been  held  in  high  estimation  by  those  who  have 
had  much  experience  of  his  influence  in  the  soul. 
It  is  the  privilege  and  the  duty  of  all  to  advance 
beyond  the  mere  elements,  and  to  seek  and 
receive  the  fulness  of  blessing  which  is  compre- 
hended in  the  promise.  Those  who  would  seek 
and  obtain  this  blessing  must  comply  with  the 
conditions  of  its  attainment. 

One    of    these    conditions   is  a   desire  for   the 


TJie  Baptism  of  iJie  Holy  Ghost.       255 

promised  blessing-.  It  would  be  most  irrational 
to  suppose  that  God  would  confer  such  a  gift  on 
those  who  have  no  desire  for  it  and  feel  no  need 
of  it.  The  desire  for  it  must  be  r^vt/ and  strong. 
The  gift  is  one  of  inestimable  value,  and  has  been 
procured  at  an  infinite  expense.  In  order  to 
appreciate  its  worth  we  should  study  with  great 
diligence  the  teachings  of  the  Scripture  respect- 
ing the  person  and  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and 
b}'^  tiiis  divine  and  spiritual  knowledge  we  shall 
not  onl}'  attain  a  true  understanding  of  the  pro- 
mise, but  perceive  its  desirableness,  its  superla- 
tive excellency,  and  the  blessedness  which  it 
confers  upon  those  who  receive  it. 

Another  condition  on  which  the  fulfilment  of 
the  promise  depends  is  prayer.  It  was  alter  the 
ten  days  of  united  and  earnest  prayer  that  the 
primitive  disciples  received  the  pentecostal  bap- 
tism. Our  Saviour  gives  both  the  condition  and 
the  encouragement  for  prayer  when  he  says 
(Luke  xi.  13):  "How  much  more  shall  your 
Heavenly  Father  give  the  Holy  Spirit  to  them 
that  ask  him  ?" 

Another  condition  is  faith.  As  God  gives  us 
the  fullest  assuranc3  in  the  Bible  that  the  bestow- 
ment  of  the  blessings  of  this  promise  is  ''accord- 
ing to  his  will,"  we  arc  to  ask  for  it,  expecting 


256     TJie  Almning  and  Pozvcr  of  Baptism. 

to  receive  that  for  which  we  j)ray.  We  are  to 
receive  the  promise  with  a  confidence  which 
excludes  all  doubt.  The  time,  the  manner,  and 
the  measure  of  the  baptism  which  Christ  by  his 
Spirit  will  confer,  will  depend  upon  his  superior 
wisdom.  We  must  be  in  a  right  state  of  mind  to 
receive  it.  But  of  his  w-illingness,  and  power, 
arid  purpose  to  bestow  this  blessing-  upon  any 
Christian  who  seeks  it  with  strongly-awakened 
desire,  genuine  faith,  and  earnest,  persevering 
pra3'er,  we  arc  to  entertain  no  doubt.  The 
veracity  of  God  is  the  ground  of  our  confidence. 

It  is  implied  in  what  has  already  been  said  that 
a  disposition  receptive  of  the  Spirit  is  a  part  of  that 
condition  of  mind  which  invites  his  incoming  and 
indwelling  in  the  soul.  All  that  tends  to  "  grieve 
the  Holy  Spirit  of  God"  must  be  avoided.  He 
is  a  personal  agent,  and  comes  to  exert  his  purify- 
ing energy  as  "the  Spirit  of  holiness."  If  the 
believer  receives  him  in  a  spirit  corresponding  to 
the  object  of  his  coming,  and  yields  himself  up 
completely  to  his  control,  he  will  dwell  with  him 
as  his  divine  Friend,  Comforter,  and  Guide,  and 
bestow  upon  him  the  fulness  of  blessing  comprised 
in  the  promise. 

The  most  comprehensive  expression  of  the 
condition    of    receiving    the   promise   which   the 


The  Baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost.        157 

Apostle  Peter  gives  is  in  Acts  v.  32,  where  lie 
speaks  of  "the  Holy  Ghost,  whom  God  hath 
given  to  them  that  obey  him."  As  the  baptism 
of  the  Spirit  is  given  to  the  believer,  not  only  to 
fill  his  soul  with  purity,  peace,  jo}',  hope,  and  all 
spiritual  affections  and  Christian  graces,  but  to 
qualify  him  also  for  his  life-work  in  the  service  of 
the  Master ;  and  as  this  spiritual  work  is  of  emi- 
nent importance  in  the  Christian  field,  the  Chris- 
tian who  seeks  and  receives  in  any  measure  the 
promise  of  the  Spirit  should  hold  himself  in  readi- 
ness for  an}'  Christian  work  which  the  Lord  Jesus 
may  give  him  to  do.  This  heavenly  baptism  in- 
volves on  his  part  a  complete  consecration  of 
himself  to  God,  and  in  this  new  condition  he  be- 
longs wholly  to  Jesus.  The  will  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  is  his  supreme  law,  and  obedience  to  him 
will  for  evermore  be  his  choice,  his  employment, 
his  honor  and  joy. 


CHAPTER  XII. 


BAPTISM   INTO   CHRIST. 


/'~\NE  of  the  improvements  in  translation  which 
^^  Dr.  Philip  Schaff  recommends  in  his  intro- 
duction to  "  The  Revision  of  the  English  Version 
of  the  New  Testament  "  is  in  Matt,  xxviii.  19, 
v.-hich  should  read,  "  Baptizing  them  into  the 
name."  He  saj'S  that  the  "false  rendering,  'in 
the  name,'  arose  from  the  Vulgate  {in  nomine ; 
Tertullian  had  it  correctly  in  nonicn^.''  Alford 
and  others  agree  with  Dr.  Schaff  that  in  all  simi- 
lar passages  the  Greek  preposition  fz?  should  be 
translated  into. 

It  is  very  unsatisfactory  to  find  this  Greek  pre- 
position, when  it  follows  the  Greek  verb  baptizo 
in  grammatical  construction,  sometimes  trans- 
lated "  for,"  sometimes  "  in,"  then  "  into,"  and 
again  "unto."  Neither  do  the  commentators 
give  an}^  more  satisfaction  by  their  var)'ing  ex- 
planations, "  Into  the  belief  of,"  "  Into  the  ac- 
knowledgment of,"  "  Into  the  profession  of,"  "  In 

order  to,"  "In  reference  to,"  "  By  the  authority 

358 


Baptism  into  Christ.  259 

of,"  "  In  obligation  unto,"  etc.,  especially  as  none 
ot  tlicse  ideas  are  in  the  language  of  the  original. 
Neither  is  it  b};-  any  means  unimportant  to  ascer- 
tain the  exact  and  true  meaning.  Well  docs  the 
Baptist  Quarterly  say:  "^  doctrine  of  graee  may 
dwell  in  the  right  understanding  of  a  single  preposi- 
tion. Who  can  measure  the  significance  and 
worth  of  this  one  expression  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, IN  Christ?"  Of  equal  significance  and 
worth  is  the  expression,  "  BAPTIZED  INTO 
Christ." 

Nor  are  we  to  despair  of  coming  to  a  right  un- 
derstanding of  its  meaning.  *'  Truth  is  the 
daughter  of  time."  It  must  be  sought  by  earnest, 
patient,  and  persevering  search.  The  method  of 
Dale,  who  develops  the  meaning  of  this  preposi- 
tion in  its  connection  with  baptizo  (/5a'7rrz'5cj  ei;) 
by  an  exhaustive  investigation  of  its  usage,  has 
led  to  a  r^esult  that  is  rich  in  spiritual  meaning,  as 
well  as  conformed  to  the  great  law  of  interpreta- 
tion that  "  Use  is  the  sole  arbiter  of  language." 

There  is  a  physical  basis  for  all  the  spiritual 
language  of  the  Bible.  There  is  a  literal,  primary 
meaning  of  words,  from  which  the  higher  and 
secondary  meanings  arise ;  and  this  growth  of 
the  secondary  meanings  from  the  primary  can 
generally  be  traced,  although  the  difference  be  as 


26o    The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

great  as  the  difference  between  the  two  spheres, 
the  physical  and  the  spiritual,  in  which  tlie}^  are 
found.  The  word  baptizo  in  connection  with  the 
preposition  cis  is  a  good  illustration  of  this  truth  ; 
and  in  tracing  its  growth  by  the  laws  of  language 
development  we  gain,  an  insight  into  its  profound 
and  affluent  significance  which  will  well  repay  the 
effort  to  understand  it. 

The  baptism  denoted  by  the  expression,  "bap- 
tized into  Christ,"  has  the  same  form  of  words  to 
represent  it  as  the  baptism  denoted  by  the  ex- 
pression, "  baptized  into  water."  The  expres- 
sion, "  baptized  into  water,''  does  not  occur  in  the 
New  Testament,  nor  any  other  form  of  words 
equivalent  to  it.  But  this  expression  often  occurs 
in  classic  Greek  to  denote  tlie  passage  of  an  object 
into  zvafer  zvithont  return.  This  physical  baptism 
in  the  secular  sphere  carries  its  object  into  the 
water  and  leaves  it  there.  The  higher  and  spirit- 
ual baptism  is  a  baptism  into  Christ.  The  differ- 
ence between  these  two  baptisms  is  as  great  as 
the  difference  between  Christ  and  water,  between 
the  influence  of  Christ  on  the  human  soul  and  the 
influence  of  water  on  the  mortal  bod}'.  Yet  there 
are  resemblances  between  these  two  baptisms. 
There  is  a  resemblance  in  the  verbal  expression, 
"  baptized   into,"       In    primary,  secular   baptism 


Baptism  into  Christ.  261 

this  form  of  words  denotes  a  literal  baptism  into 
zvatcr.  The  same  form  of  words,  by  verbal 
figure,  is  transferred  from  the  phj^sical  to  the 
spiritual  sphere  to  denote  baptism  into  Christ. 
Similar  are  the  forms  of  expression,  "  baptize 
into  repentance,"  "  the  baptism  of  repentance 
into  the  remission  of  sins."  Thus  the  two  classes 
of  baptisms,  the  physical  and  the  spiritual,  greatly 
as  they  differ  from  each  other,  have  the  same  ver- 
bal form  of  expression,  "  baptized  into,"  to  denote 
them.  In  secular  baptisms  these  words  have 
their  literal  meaning-.  The  receptive  element 
into  which  the  object  passes  in  its  baptism  is 
zvatcr.  In  spiritual  baptism  water  does  not  ap- 
pear. There  is  no  physical  receptiv^e  element. 
But  by  verbal  figure  the  same  form  of  expression 
is  used,  and  is  so  used  as  to  designate  the  special 
character  of  diverse  baptisms  with  exact  dis- 
crimination. 

The  resemblance  between  these  two  classes  of 
baptisms  is  not  confined  to  the  mere  form  of 
words  by  which  they  are  denoted.  There  is 
also  a  resemblance  in  their  interior  signification. 
TJicrc  is  an  element  common  to  both  classes  of  bap- 
tisms, and  the  tracing  of  this  common  element 
from  its  origin  in  primary  baptism  to  its  develop- 
ment in  secondary  baptism   gives  an  instructive 


262    TJie  Aleaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

and  satisfactory  view  of  its  spiritual  import. 
This  common  element,  which  belongs  alike  to 
physical  baptisms  and  to  those  which  are  spirit- 
ual, is  that  of  INFLUENCE.  It  consists  in  the 
influence  which  baptizing  agencies  have  over  the 
objects  which  they  baptize.  The  baptizing  power 
has  an  influence  to  change  the  condition  and 
character  of  its  object.  This  is  true  in  the 
physical  sphere.  Ships,  animals,  human  beings, 
and  other  objects,  remaining  imder  water  for  a 
long  period,  as  they  do  in  the  Greekl}^  baptisms 
of  classic  writers,  come  under  tlie  eontrolling  in- 
fluence of  the  water,  which  in  the  course  of  time 
completely  changes  their  condition. 

There  arc  Greekly  baptir^ns,  also,  in  which 
there  is  no  intusposition  in  water.  The  objects 
of  baptism  are  not  enveloped  in  the  watery 
element.  There  are  baptizing  agencies  Avhich 
exert  a  powerful  influence  over  the  condition  of 
their  objects  in  a  mode  totall}'  different  from  that 
of  immersion.  The  baptismal  agency  is  drunk 
from  a  cup,  and  when  drunk  it  penetrates  the 
S3"stem  of  the  drinker,  and  exerts  upon  him  a 
powerful,  and  sometimes  a  controlling-,  influence. 
The  baptizing  agencies  are  numerous  and  various. 
The  modes  by  which  these  agencies  are  brought 
to  act  upon  their  objects  are  also  very  diverse. 


Baptism  into  Christ.  263 

Tlie  baptisms,  or  the  changes  oi'  conditioa  whicli 
result,  are  as  diverse  as  the  baptizing-  agencies 
are  diverse  in  their  nature  and  power.  Sometimes 
tlic  same  baptizing  agency  causes  diverse  results, 
(^r  baptisms,  which,  by  the  use  of  verbal  figure, 
can  be  distinguished  from  each  other  \vith  pre- 
cision. All  baptismal  agencies  have  iiijlucjicc, 
and  each  has  its  ouni  cJiaractcristic  injhicucc,  over 
the  respective  objects  which  they  baptize. 

So  it  is  in  the  spiritual  sphere.  K  soul  baptized 
into  Christ  comes  under  THE  CONTROLLING  INFLU- 
ENCE OF  Christ,  and  by  that  influence  is  changed  in 
character.  As,  also,  any  object  baptized  into  wa- 
ter remains  IN  tlie  zuater,  so  those  who  are  baptized 
into  Christ  remain  IN  Christ;  and  as  objects  re- 
maining in  the  zvater  are  by  this  their  physical 
baptism  changed  in  their  state  or  condition  by  the 
powerful  action  of  the  water  over  them,  so  in 
the  superior,  spiritual  baptism,  remaining  in 
Christ  and  under  the  power  of  his  influence,  the 
soul  is  changed  in  its  spiritual  condition,  and  be- 
comes assimilated  to   him   in    its  character. 

A  brief  illustration  of  the  original  and  primary 
use  of  the  expression,  "baptized  into,"  will  aid 
in  the  understanding  of  its  secondar}^  use. 

Heliodorus  says  :  "  Every  form  of  war  was  en- 
acted,   .    .    .    slaying  some  on  land,  and  baptizing 


264    The  Alcaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

others,  with  their  boats  and  huts,  into  the  lake  " 
(Conant,  p.  39). 

This  is  one  of  many  examples  which  illustrate 
what  Dr.  Conant  saA'S  (p.  89) — that  "  the  Greek 
word  is  also  used  where  a  living  being  is  put  un- 
der water  for  the  purpose  of  drowning,  and  of 
course  is  left  to  perish  in  the  immersing  element." 

Achilles  Tatius  says:  "And  there  is  a  fountain 
of  gold  there.  The}',  therefore,  baptize  into  the 
water  a  pole  smeared  with  pitch.  .  .  .  And  the 
pole  is  to  the  gold  what  the  hook  is  to  the  fish, 
for  it  catches  it  "  (p.  40). 

The  pole  prepared  with  pitch  is  put  into  the 
water  in  order  to  catch  the  particles  of  gold  that 
are  floating  in  the  stream. 

Strabo  says:  "The  water  solidifies  so  readily 
around  everything  that  is  baptized  into  it  that 
they  draw. up  salt  crowns  when  they  let  down  a 
circle  of  rushes  "  (p.  29). 

Hippocrates,  in  a  medical  work,  says:  "Again 
baptize  it  iiito  breast-milk  "  (p.  34). 

The  design  of  the  prescription  v^^as  to  secure 
the  emollient  influence  of  the  milk. 

In  these  and  similar  examples  the  object  passes 
into  a  ph3'sical  element,  water  or  some  other 
fluid,  by  the  agency  of  which  it  undergoes  a 
chancre.     The  nature  of  the  chancfc  in  each  case 


Baptism  into  Christ.  265 

will  depend  upon  the  nature  of  the  receptive  cle- 
ment under  whose  influence  the  object  passes. 
A  living-  being  enveloped  in  water  will  perish  by 
suffocation,  A  g^old-bearing  fountain  gilds  the 
pole  immersed  in  it.  Intusposition  ia  milk  makes 
einollicnt ;  in  blood,  makes  the  object  ;r</.  Intus- 
position in  water  saturated  with  salt  causes  in- 
crustation. Each  baptismal  agency  imparts  its 
own  cJiaracteristic  quality  to  the  object  which 
comes  under  its  influence. 

The  transition  from  baptisms  of  this  class  to 
those  of  the  secondary  class  in  wiiich  the  expres- 
sion "  baptized  into  "  is  used  in  verbal  figure  is 
natural  and  easily  traced.  In  tlie  secondar_v 
class  of  baptisms  there  is  no  physical  receptive 
element,  no  intusposition  in  water,  no  immersion; 
but  there  is  an  ideal  cknunt,  and  that  ideal  ele- 
ment resembles  the  physical  element  in  the  com- 
mon idea  of,  iiijliicnce.  In  primary  baptisms  the 
object  passes  into,  and  comes  under  the  control- 
ling influence  of,  soine//yj-/r^/ elen^ient.  In  secon- 
dary baptisms  the  object  passes  into  an  ideal  ele- 
ment, and  comes  under  its  controlling  influence 
In  other  respects  the  difference  between  (he  two 
classes  of  baptisms  is  total  and  absolute.  Two 
or  three  examples  will  be  sufficient  to  illustrate 
this  class  of  baptisms. 


266    TJie  Mea7iing  and  Pozcer  of  Baptis77i. 

Josepluis,  describing"  the  condition  of  Gedaliaii 
at  a  drinking  part}-,  employs  this  expression: 
"  Baptized  into  insensibility  and  sleep  by  drunk- 
enness "  ("  Jud.  Bap.,"  p.  92). 

The  drunkenness  of  Gedaliah  brought  him  into 
an  insensible  condition — a  condition  of  stupor 
and  sleep.  There  was  no  ph3'sical  clement  into 
which  Gedaliah  passed  and  by  which  he  was  en- 
closed in  this  baptism;  but  the  condition  of  in- 
sensibihtv  and  sleep  into  which  he  passed  is  ex- 
pressed in  a  fcjrm  ot  language  borrowed  from 
physical  baptisms.  As  a  man  baptized  into  water 
comes  under  the  controlling  influence  of  tlie 
water  as  a  receptive  element,  so  a  man  baptized 
into  stupor  arid  sleep  comes  under  the  control- 
ling influence  of  stup<^r  and  sleep  as  the  ideal  ele- 
ment. The  resemblance  is  in  the  common  idea  of 
iujluencc  which  belongs  to  both  the  physical  and 
the  ideal  elements.  In  the  one  class  of  examples 
the  object  passes  into  a  physical,  fluid  element, 
and  comes  under  its  control ;  in  the  other  class 
the  object  passes  into  an  ideal  element,  and  comes 
under  its  control. 

Another   example   occui's   in  Clemens   Alexan- 
drinus:  "Baptized    by    drunkenness    into  sleep 
("  Johannic  Baptism,"  p.  25i). 

\\\  this,  as  in  the  preceding,  example,  "  drimk- 


Baptism  i':to  CJirist.  267 

enness  "  is  the  baptizing-  power,  and  "sleep"  is 
the  verbal  element  denoting'  the  condition  into 
which,  and  under  the  influence  of  which,  the 
object  passes. 

The  nature  of  a  baptism  is  always  determined 
by  the  nature  of  the  baptizing  power.  Good 
instruction  can  baptize  into  a  condition  of  men- 
tal purity.  "  Baptized  by  the  word  of  doctrine  " 
(p.  201  j,  says  Basil.  In  like  manner  bad  instruc- 
tion can  baptize  into  a  condition  of  vice.  Thus 
Clemens  Alexandrinus  says  of  a  certain  class 
of  teachers:  "  Teaching  the  practice  of  pleasure 
and  passion,  the}-  baptize  out  of  chastity  into  for- 
nication "  (p.  261). 

These  quotations  are  sufficient  to  illustrate 
this  usage.  There  is  no  literal,  physical,  fluid 
element  into  which  the  object  passes,  but  there 
is  an  ideal  element,  denoting  b}^  verbal  figure 
the  condition  into  zvhich  tJu  object  comes  as  the  effect 
of  the  baptizing  power. 

There  is  a  special  advantage  in  this  use  of 
verbal  figure  to  denote  the  ideal  element  in  this 
class  of  baptisms.  It  furnishes  a  form  of  words 
by  which  the  different  baptisms  caused  by  diffe- 
rent baptismal  agencies  can  be  distinguished 
from  each  other  with  exact  discrimination. 
Sometimes  the  same  baptizing  power  is  capable 


268    The  Meaning  and  Poiucr  of  Baptism. 

of  producing  different  conditions,  or  baptisms. 
In  all  these  cases  the  nature  of  the  baptism  can 
be  known  from  tlie  nature  of  the  ideal  element 
which  is  represented,  in  verbal  figure,  bj  the 
words  "  baptized  into."  Thus,  while  wine  pro- 
duces only  one  specific  effect  on  the  drinker — 
viz.,  a  wine-baptism,  or  drunkenness — the  effects 
of  drunkenness  are  greatly  diversified.  And 
since  drunkenness,  according  to  Josephus  and 
Clement,  is  a  baptizing  power,  the  baptisms 
caused  by  drunkenness  may  be  diverse.  But 
this  verbal  figure  furnishes  an  admirable  form 
of  words  to  define  and  limit  these  diverse  bap- 
tisms. Drunkenness  can  not  only  baptize  into 
insensibility  and  sleep,  but  it  can  baptize  into 
povert}',  into  shame,  into  crime,  into  despair,  into 
destruction,  and  each  of  these  diverse  conditions 
can  be  designated  with  precision  b}'  the  use  of 
this  verbal  figure.  Belshazzar,  the  King  of 
Babylon,  by  his  iniquity  was  baptized  into  terror, 
into  miser}^  into  destruction  (Isa.  xxi.  4,  Sept.) 
If  these  various  specific  results  of  a  single  baptiz- 
ing agency  can  be  thus  distinguished  from  each 
other  by  this  verbal  figure,  with  equal  power 
of  discrimination  the  same  verbal  figure  can 
designate  the  different  baptisms  which  result 
from  different  asrencies. 


Baptism  into  Christ,  269 

"BAPTIZED   INTO    MOSES." 

This  verbal  figure  is  often  used  in  llie  New 
Testament  and  by  the  Christian  fathers,  and 
serves  to  give  the  most  definite  and  complete  ex- 
pression to  the  thought.  Paul  says:  "Our 
fathers  .  .  .  were  all  baptized  into  Moses " 
(i  Cor.  X.  2).  The  baptism  was  not  into  xvater, 
but  into  liloscs.  The  expression  exactly  defines 
and  limits  the  baptism.  They  were  baptized  into 
Moses,  not  into  Pharaoh.  By  this  baptism  the 
Israelites  were  delivered  from  the  power  and 
dominion  of  the  Egyptian  king,  and  brought  into 
subjection  to  Moses.  This  baptism  into  Moses 
brought  them  into  complete  subjection  to  his  con- 
trol. The  nature  of  the  baptism  consisted  in  the 
nature  of  the  infiuence  which  Moses  had  over 
the  nation  as  their  leader.  The  expression,  "  bap- 
tized into  Moses,"  denotes  the  fulness  and  com- 
pleteness of  the  devotion  of  the  Israelites  to 
Moses  as  their  divinely-appointed  leader  to  the 
promised  land.  The  whole  nation  were  baptized 
into  Moses,  and  this  baptism  gave  him  a  complete 
and  controlling  influence  over  them,  and  they 
were  willing  to  follow  him  into  the  great  and  ter- 
rible wilderness.  Before  this  baptism  they  were 
fearful,  distrustful,  insubmissivc,  and  almost  ready 


2/0    The  Meaning  and  Poiver  of  B  apt  ism. 

to  go  back  and  "  serve  the  Egyptians."  But  in 
their  baptism  their  whole  condition  and  attitude 
towards  Moses  were  changed.  There  was  no  "  de- 
finite act"  in  this  baptism,  nor  did  the  nation  pass 
into  any  physical  receptive  element.  But  they 
did  pass  into  a  condition  of  subjection  to  the  in- 
fluence of  Moses,  and  this  is  very  happily  ex- 
pressed in  the  verbal  form  of  an  ideal  element 
which  defines  with  precision  the  thought  which 
was  meant  to  be  conveyed, 

"BAPTIZED   INTO   JOSHUA." 

The  Fatrists,  in  like  manner,  employ  this  form 
of  expression.  Origen,  referring  to  i  Cor.  x.  2, 
"baptized  into  INIoses,"  saj's:  "So,  also,  it  may 
be  said  of  Joshua,  that  all  were  baptized  into 
Joshua  by  the  Holy  Spirit  and  water  "  "  Jud. 
Bap.,"  p.  321). 

They  were  not  baptized  into  the  zvatcr.  They 
were  baptized  into  Joshua  /;/  the  w^ater,  or, 
as  Origen  sa3's  in  other  places,  "  by  the  Jor- 
dan," '^  by  the  Spirit  and  the  river.''  The  Holy 
Spirit  and  the  water  of  the  river  were  the 
agencies  by  which  the  baptism  into  Joshua 
was  effected.  There  was  no  immersion  in 
this    baptism.       The   water    of   the  river    below 


Bap  I  ism  into  Chvist.  271 

the  ci-()ssing  flowed  away  to  the  Dead  Sea,  the 
water  above  "rose- up  upon  an  heap,"  and  "all 
the  Israelites  passed  over  on  dry  ground."  The 
very  object  of  the  miracle  was  to  keep  them  out 
of  the  water.  The  whole  narrative  absolutely 
excludes  the  idea  of  ''  a  definite  act  " — dipping 
a  nation  of  people  into  the  water.  They  were 
made  willing  to  follow  Joshua  as  their  leader  by 
the  influence  of  the  miracle  and  of  the  Holy  Spi- 
rit. They  were  baptized  into  JosJiua.  It  is  impos- 
sible to  explain  this  as  a  literal  baptism.  The  Isra- 
elites were  not  put  into  Joshua  as  into  a  receptacle, 
or  into  a  physical  element,  like  water.  Two  mil- 
lions of  people  cannot  be  literally  put  into  one 
man.  But  by  verbal  figure  this  form  of  words 
expresses  the  subjection  of  the  Israelites  to 
Joshua  as  their  leader.  There  is  no  resemblance 
whatever  between  the  mode  of  this  baptism  and 
any  mode  of  literal  baptism.  But  there  is  an  in- 
structive resemblance  in  relation  to  tJie  source  of 
the  influence  in  the  two  classes  of  baptisms.  In 
one  class  of  those  physical  baptisms  which  are 
denoted  b}-  the  expression  "  baptized  into,"  the 
design  is  to  develop  the  characteristic  quality  of 
the  enveloping  element  over  the  object  which  it 
encloses.  "They  baptize  a  pole  into  the  water" 
to  develop  the  gold-bearing  quality  of  the  water, 


2']  2     The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

and  cover  the  pole  wiLh  gold  particles;  "bap- 
tizing- others  into  the  lake  "  to  subject  them  to 
the  suffocating  influence  of  the  water  and  drown 
them;  '"baptize  it  into  milk"  to  develop  the 
emollient  quality  of  the  milk  ;  the  salt  quality 
of  the  water,  of  which  Strabo  speaks,  encrusts 
with  salt  the  circle  of  i^ushes  "baptized  into  it," 
so  that  they  draw  up  salt  crowns.  In  all  these 
and  similar  examples  the  intusposition  in  water 
or  other  fluid  is  for  the  sake  of  securing  the  influ- 
ence of  the  investing  clement  over  the  baptized 
object. 

So  in  the  class  of  baptisms  in  which  there  is 
no  intusposition  in  a  physical  element,  but  where 
the  influence  of  an  ideal  element  is  secured,  the 
source  of  that  influence  is  expressed  b}'  verbal 
flgure  in  the  same  form  of  words.  Thus  Origen 
says  the  Israelites  "  were  all  baptized  into  Joshua." 
They  v/ere  devoted  to  him  as  their  leader,  and 
came  under  his  direction  and  control.  Their 
wdiole  condition  and  character  were  modjhed  and 
changed  by  the  kind  of  influence  whicli  Joshua 
exerted  over  them.  This  subjection  to  the  influ- 
ence of  Joshua  as  their  leader  was  the  baptism  of 
Israel  at  the  river  Jordan. 


Baptism  into  CJirist.  273 

GAL.  III.  27: 

"  For  as  man}'  of  you  as  have  been  baptized  into 
Christ  have  put  on  Christ." 

The  exposition  of  this  and  similar  passages  in 
conformity  with  the  principle  that  "  usage  gives 
law  to  language  "  will  develop  its  true  meaning. 
The  meaning  is  clearly  seen  from  the  illustrations 
which  have  already  been  given  of  the  use  of  the 
foi"m  of  verbal  figure  which  appears  in  the  im- 
portant expression,  "  baptized  unto  Christ." 

We  have  alread}-  seen  that  a  person  may  be  in- 
troduced, by  verbal  figure,  as  the  ideal  receptive 
element  in  a  baptism.  We  have  also  seen  that 
the  nature  of  the  receptive  element  determines 
the  nature  of  the  baptism.  The  baptism  of  this 
passage  has  in  it  nothing  peculiar  except  the 
character  of  the  person,  which  determines  the 
character  of  the  baptism. 

As  there  was  a  baptism  into  Moses  and  into 
JosJma,  so  there  is  a  baptism  into  CJirist.  JMoses 
was  a  type  of  Christ,  and  Joshua  another.  As 
the  baptism  of  Israel  into  Moses  was  their  subjec- 
tion to  the  special  authority  and  guidance  of 
Moses,  and  as  their  baptism  into  Joshua  was 
their  subjection  to  the  special  control  and  leader- 
ship of  Joshua,  so  is  baptism  into  Christ  a  subjec- 


2  74     The  Meatihig  ar.d  Pozver  of  Ba pi  ism. 


tion  to  the  special  inilaciicc  ol  Christ  as  Savior.r 
and  Lord.  The  expression,  rightly  understood, 
has  a  meaning  weighty  and  profound.  It  denotes 
the  lull,  peculiar,  and  controlling  influence  which 
Christ  exerts  on  those  who  by  the  Holy  Ghost 
are  baptized  into  him.  By  their  baptism  into 
Christ  they  come  under  the  power  which  he 
has  to  change  their  spiritual  nature  and  to  as- 
similate their  character  to  his  own.  All  baptiz- 
ing agencies  have  an  assimilating  power  b}' 
which  the}'  communicate  each  its  own  charac- 
teristic quality  to  the  baptized  object.  Those 
who  arc  baptized  into  Christ  receive  from  him 
his  own  characteristic  and  transforming  influence. 
Christ  enstamps  upon  the  soul  his  own  bright 
image.  Baptized  into  Christ,  the  soul  becomes 
like  him  in  its  spiritual  dispositions  and  in  its 
new  and  heavenly  virtues.  It  is  a  regenerative 
baptism  through  the  agency  of  the  Hoh*  Ghost 
uniting  the  soul  to  Christ. 

This  is  not  ritual  baptism.  The  very  terms  in 
which  the  apostle  describes  it  exclude  the  ex- 
ternal and  declare  the  internal  and  spiritual: 
"  As  many  of  you  as  have  been  baptized  into 
Christ  liave  put  on  Christ^  This  is  something 
more  profound  than  an  outward  rite  or  an  ex- 
ternal  [)rofession.     To   put  on   any  one,  by  uni- 


Baptism  into  Christ. 


-/D 


versal  usage,  meant  an  assumption  of  liis  cliarac- 
ter.  To  put  on  Christ  is  to  be  clothed  with  the 
gai-ment  of  his  virtues  as  the  dress  of  the  soul. 
He  who  is  clothed  with  Christ  is  invested  with 
" //^e' r^/^f  ^/RIGHTEOUSNESS."  The  Avhole  chap- 
ter treats  of  union  with  Christ  by  faith  through 
the  Spirit  of  God.  He  who  puts  on  Christ  be- 
comes Christ-like.  His  likeness  to  Christ  in 
character  becomes  such  that  what  Christ  is,  is 
seen  in  all  his  conduct.  This  investiture  of  the 
soul  with  the  character  of  Christ  is  the  baptism 
into  Christ. 

ACTS  VIII.    i6: 

"  The}'  were   baptized   into  [f/?]  the  name  of  the 
Lord  Jesus." 

The  use  of  a  different  formula  of  baptism  by 
the  apostles  from  the  one  giv'^en  in  iSIatt.  xxviii. 
19  is  ijemarkable,  but  no  mode  of  accounting  ior 
it  has  ever  proved  satisfactory.  The  exposition 
of  Matt,  xxviii.  19  by  Dr.  Dale  makes  the  whole 
subject  clear  and  consistent,  and  will  attract  the 
attention  of  Christian  scholars.  The  meaning 
which  he  develops  is  sustained  by  strong  reasons 
and  is  very  interesting,  but  the  subject  lies  be- 
yond the  scope  of  this  book.  But  in  the  formula 
which   tlie  apostles   used    the  translation    of  the 


276     The  Meaning  and  Pozver  of  Baptisiit, 

preposition,  into,  is  the  one  which  gives  the  true 
meaning-.  It  is  al\vn3's  translated  "into"  by  Dr. 
Conant  in  its  classic  usage,  and  most  other  recent 
scholars  so  translate  it  in  the  New  Testament. 
In  Acts  X.  48,  "  Baptized  in  the  name  of  the 
Lord,"  the  Greek  preposition  hv  is  used,  and 
signifies  by  the  authority  of  the  Lord.  In  Acts 
ii.  38,  "  In  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,"  the  Greek 
preposition  ETti  is  used,  denoting  the  reliance  icpon 
Christ  in  which  the  nature  of  faith  consists. 
These  three  different  forms  of  expression  in  the 
Greek  of  the  inspired  writers  have  different 
meanings,  and  these  different  meanings  ought  to 
be  kept  clear  and  distinct.  The  Greek  ex- 
pression ^anTi8,co  eii  is  an  organic  phrase,  and 
should  alwa3's  be  translated  baptize  into.  In  all 
cases,  by  universal  consent  of  scholars,  in  physi- 
cal baptism,  where  this  expression  occurs,  the 
object  passes  into  the  zuatcr  or  other  clement. 
And  where  there  is  no  intusposition  in  water  or 
other  physical  element,  but  whei'e  the  element 
into  which  the  object  (verbally),  passes  is  ideal, 
Dr.  Conant,  in  his  translations  outside  of  the 
Scriptures,  is  in  accord  with  all  other  scholars  in 
ti"anslating  the  preposition  "  into."  Usage  gives 
law  to  language  ;  and  in  the  New  Testament  con- 
formity to  this  law  and  consistency  of  interpreta- 


Baptism  info  Christ.  2  J  J 

t  on  both  require  the  translation  into  when  the 
preposition  follows  baptizo  in  grammatical  con- 
struction. When  it  follows  other  words,  the 
usage  is  often  different. 

But  what  is  the  signification  of  the  expression, 
"baptized  into  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus"? 
The  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus  denotes  his  whole 
person,  character,  and  work  as  the  Redee:\ier, 
the  Incarnate  Son  of  God.  The  expression,  "  bap- 
tized INTO  the  name,"  presents  "  the  name  of  the 
Lord  Jesus,"  b\'  verbal  figure,  as  the  ideal  element 
into  which,  and  inider  the  influence  of  which,  the 
baptized  person  comes.  The  character  of  the 
baptism  is  known  from  the  character  of  the  re- 
ceptive element,  which  in  this  instance  is  not 
ph3'sical  but  ideal.  The  baptism  of  the  soul  by 
the  Holy  Ghost  into  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus 
introduces  the  soul  into  a  oneness  witJi,  Christy  and 
secures  his  controlling  influence  over  the  soul, 
thoroughly  changing  its  spiritual  condition  into 
a  state  of  harmony  with  him.  This  internal  and 
spiritual  baptism  is  symbolized  by  an  external 
rite.  Christian  baptism  is  twofold — real  in  the 
soul,  and  ritual  m  the  emblem.  "  The  ritual  bap- 
tism of  Christianity  has  no  independent  existence 
as  a  baptism.  It  is  solely  the  adumbration  of  the 
baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost.     They   are  not   two 


2  78    The  Mcani)ig  a?:d  Pozccr  of  Baptisvt. 

baptisms,  the  one  spiritual  and  the  other  physi- 
cal, but  '  o.iC  baptism,'  the  former  real,  the  latter 
ritual,  symbol  of  the  real."  The  mere  external 
rite  has  in  itself  no  cfficacv,  and  is  but  an  empty 
form.  But  in  its  true  relation  to  the  baptism  of 
tiie  soul  by  the  Holy  Ghost  it  has  the  significance 
and  power  of  a  symbol.  This  symbol  power  does 
not  consist  in  the  mere  act,  but  in  the  purifying 
quality  of  the  water,  which  renders  it  a  suitable 
emblem  of  the  purification  of  the  soul  b}-  the 
Holy  Ghost. 

ACTS  XIX.  5  : 

"  Tl^.e\'  were  baptized  into  the  name  of  the  Lord 
Jesus." 

This,  like  the  preceding,  is  an  example  of  I'itual 
baptism.  Paul  found  t\velve  disciples  of  John 
the  Baptist  at  Ephcsus.  Finding  them  lacking  in 
Christian  knowledge  and  the  gift  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  he  enquired :  "  Into  what  [baptism]  then 
were  ye  baptized  ?  "  They  replied  :  "  Into  John's 
baptism."  The  baptism  which  John  administered 
is  expressed  by  the  ritual  formula,  "  I  baptize, 
with  water,  into  repentance."  The  baptism  which 
he  preached  was  "  the  baptism  of  repentance  into 
the  remission  of  sins."     The  rite  which  he  admin- 


Baptism  into  Christ.  279 

istered  was  "a  symbol  of  the  puriticatiou  of  the 
soul  consequent  upon  repentance.  .  .  .  The  bap- 
tism *  into  repentance '  was  not  the  sole  or  ultimate 
baptism  to  be  received,  but  was  only  antecedent 
to  another  baptism  inseparable  from  it,  namely, 
'  into  the  remission  of  sins' — the  strongest  possi- 
ble expression  declarative  of  a  condition  in  which 
there  was  complete  pardon  of  sin  "  (Dale). 

The  baptism  of  John  derived  all  its  efficacy 
from  the  Lamb  of  God,  for  whose  coming-  it  pre- 
pared the  wav.  The  baptism  of  Christianity  in- 
cluded all  that  was  valuable  in  John's  baptism, 
and  it  superadded  blessings  immeasurably  supe- 
rior. Tlic  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus  is  the  source 
whence  come  the  remissian  of  sins  and  all  other 
spiritual  blessings.  Into  his  name,  therefore,  the 
twelve  were  baptized,  and  "the  Holy  Ghost  came 
on  tiiem." 

The  ritual  baptism  of  John  and  the  ritual  bap- 
tism of  Christianity  was  not  a  baptism  into  tvater, 
but  a  baptism  luit/i  loater.  Water  never  appears 
in  the  New  Testament  as  the  receptive  element, 
but  always  as  the  instrumental  agency.  The  two 
examples  of  ritual  baptism  just  noticed  present 
the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus  as  the  ideal  element, 
but  say  nothing  of  the  mode  of  using  the  water. 
The  sacred  historian,  in  speaking  of  the  use   of 


2  So    The  Meaning  and  Pozvcr  of  Baptism. 

S3Tnbol  water  in  baptism,  employs  the  dative 
without  the  preposition — Luke  iii.  i6,  Acts  i,  5, 
xi.  16 — denoting-  the  clement  WITH  zvhich  the  rite 
was  performed.  This  was  doubtless  its  use  in 
these  and  all  ether  examples  of  ritual  baptism, 

ROMANS   VI.    3: 

"  Know  ye  not  that  so  many  of  us  as  were  bap- 
tized into  Jesus  Christ  were   baptized   into   his 

death?" 

Baptism  into  the  death  of  Jesus  Christ  is  bap- 
tism into  Christ  in  his  special  character  as  dving 
on  the  cross  for  our  redemption.  The  special 
and  definite  nature  of  this  baptism  is  expressed 
with  discrimination  and  precision  by  the  use  of 
the  verbal  figure,  "  baptized  into  his  death." 
Like  other  baptisms  of  the  same  class,  the  char- 
acter of  this  baptism  is  known  from  the  character 
of  the  ideal  element.  The  ideal  element  in  this 
baptism  is  the  death  of  Jesus  Christ ;  and  as  his 
death  has  an  atoning  efficacy,  those  baptized  into 
his  death  receive  the  characteristic  influence 
which  his  atoning  death  has  power  to  exert.  The 
death  of  Christ  has  a  sin-remitting  power  and  a 
soul-purif)'ing-  power,  and  those  who,  by  baptism 
into    his   death,    come    under    its   influence,    are 


Baptism  niio  Christ.  281 

thoroughly  changed  iii  their  spiritual  condition. 
This  is  the  reason  why  they  become,  as  Paul 
says,  "dead  to  sin,"  and  "live  therein  no  longer." 
It  is  the  power  of  this  baptism  which  produces 
this  spiritual  effect.  No  external  rite  can  ac- 
complish such  a  result. 

This  is  not  ritual  baptism.  There  is  nothing 
in  the  lan^'uaire  or  in  the  thouglit  that  denotes 
the  external  rite.  There  is  no  administration  of 
the  rite,  no  description  of  the  rite,  no  exposition 
of  the  rite,  no  circumstance  that  i^elates  to  the 
rite.     There  is  nothing  external  in  this  baptism. 

The  whole  theme  of  discourse  relates  to  the 
condition  of  the  soul,  the  power  of  the  Gospel 
to  change  its  character,  so  .that  it  shall  become 
dead  to  sin  and  continue  therein  no  longer,  but, 
in  spiritual  union  with  Christ,  live  a  new  life. 

The  nature  of  this  baptism  is  specified  and  de- 
fined so^as  to  make  it  definite  and  distinct.  The 
form  of  expression  which,  b}^  verbal  figure,  repre- 
sents the  death  of  Jesus  Christ  as  the  ideal  clement 
in  this  baptism,'  designates  its  special  character, 
and  distinguishes  it  from  every  other  baptism 
with  the  most  exact  discrimination.  The  bap- 
tism is  not  into  ivatcr.  This  physical  baptism  is 
not  only  not  named  by  the  apostle,  but  it  is  ex- 
cluded by  the  totally  different  baptism  which   he 


282    The  Mean  ing  a  mi  Power  of  Bapiism. 

specifies  and  describes.  The  receptive  element 
is  not  water  or  any  physical  element,  but  the  bap- 
tism is  itito  tJw  death  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  THIS  is 
what  marks  its  character  and  gives  it  its  spiritual 
import. 

Tlie  baptism  is  internal  and  spiritual  in  its 
nature;  and  tliis  internal  and  spiritual  baptism 
alone  is  capable  of  meeting  the  demand  of  the 
apostle's  ai-gument.  Paul  was  a  good  reasoner ; 
and  when  he  undertakes  to  refute  the  objection 
that  his  doctrine  of  grace  leads  men  to  continue 
in  sin,  we  have  a  right  to  expect  a  7'^//c/ reason. 
He  adduces  the  fact  that  we  are  "  baptized  into 
the  death  of  Christ,"  as  Augustine  says,  "  to 
PROVE  that  we  are  dead  to  sin."  The  external 
rite,  in  whatever  form  administered,  cannot 
prove  this,  as  millions  of  examples  of  the  fail- 
ure of  the  external  rite  to  promote  holiness 
attest.  No  external  profession  can  prove  it. 
The  internal  and  spiritual  baptism  alone  can 
ensure  that  holy  living  which  the  cogency  and 
validity  of  the  apostle's  argument  require.  It  is 
the  spiritual  efficacy  of  this  baptism  that  renders 
the  argument  of  the  apostle  conclusive,  and 
gives  it  its  triumph. 


■'  Baptism  into  Christ.  283 

ROM.  VI.  4: 

"  Therefore   we  are  buried   with  him  b}^  baptism 
into  death." 

Into  what  death  ?  Not  death  in  general,  but 
tiie  death  of  Jesus  Christ.  The  dehnite  article 
before  the  word  '*^  death"  in  the  Greek  {rov 
Bavarov)  designates  a  particular  death  —  the 
death  just  spoken  of,  "his  deaths  The  definite 
article  before  the  word  "  baptism  '  in  the  Greek 
also  indicates  a  particular  baptism — viz.,  the  bap- 
tism spoken  of  in  the  previous  verse,  "  baptized 
into  his  death."  The  preposition  "into"  marks 
the  relation  of  *'  the  death  "  to  "  the  baptism,"  "  the 
baptism  into  his  death."  It.  is  not  "  buried  into 
death,"  as  some,  not  observing  the  grammatical 
construction,  erroneously  represent,  but  "  by 
baptism  into  Ids  death  we  are  buried  ivitJi  him.'" 
Jesus  was  buried  in  a  rock  sepulchre.  We  are 
buried  WITH  IIIM,  not  in  water,  but  in  the  tomb 
of  Calvary.  Christ  was  (literall}')  crucified  and 
buried.  We  are  crucified  and  buried  with  him 
(figuratively)  by  union  with  Inm.  Through  faith 
in  his  atoning  death — "  baptized  into  his  death  " — ■ 
we  receive  the  special  influences  and  blessings 
which  that  death  lias  power  to  impart.  The 
phrase,  "  buried    with    him,"  merely    carries   out 


284    The  Meaning  and  Power  of  Baptism. 

and  intensifies  tlie  tliougiit.  Tiic  burial  of  Christ 
was  the  fit  sequel  to  his  death.  Tlicy  who  arc 
crucified  with  Christ  are,  by  the  cong-ruily  of 
the  metaphor,  buried  with  him,  as  they  are  also 
risen  with  him. 

COL.  II.  12  : 
"  Buried  with  him  in  baptism." 

Translating  the  Greek  article  before  "  baptism," 
and  supplj'ing  the  ellipsis  from  Rom.  vi.  4,  it  will 
read,  "  Buried  with  him  in  the  baptism  "  (into  his 
death).     The  sentiment  is  the  same  in  both  places. 

The  internal  and  spiritnal  meaning  of  this  pas- 
sage is  made  clear  and  certain  by  its  connection 
with  the  previous  verse.  The  burial  with  Christ 
in  baptism  is  the  circumcision  of  Christ,  which 
is  spiritual,  "  made  without  hands,"  a  change  of 
spiritual  condition,  a  renovation  of  character, 
"  putting  off  the  body  of  the  sins  of  the  flesh  by 
the  circumcision  of  Christ:  buried  with  him  in 
baptism."  The  Patrists  identify  "the  circum- 
cision of  Christ"  and  "the  burial  with  him  in 
baptism  "  as  one  and  the  same  thing,  and  spirit- 
ual in  signification.     (See  Chap.  II.,  p.  61.) 

The  spiritual  nature  of  the  baptism  is  also  in- 
dicated in   the   English  version  of  what  follows. 


B  a  pi  ism  into  CJirisf.  2*^5 

which  comprises /"^i///;  as  an  essential  constituent 
in  tiic  baptism:  '*  Wherein  also  ye  are  risen  with 
him  through  the  faith  of  the  operation  of  Gocl." 
Prof.  Stuart  translates:  "  Ye  have  risen  with  him 
[Christ],  b}'  faith  WROUGHT  BY  the  power  of 
Gocl,"  and  sa3S  :  "  Here,  there  is  a  resurrection  by 
faitJi — i.e.,  a  spiritual,  moral  one  "  (p.  329).  The 
translation  of  T3'ndale  is  the  same.  Olshausen 
says  that  "  all  the  later  interpreters  are  unani- 
mous on  the  point  that  the  meaning  is,  'faith 
which  the  operation  of  God  calls  forth.'  " 

Some  who  see  and  admit  that  "  the  leading-, 
underlying  thought  is  death  to  sin,  and  spiritual 
resurrection  to  newness  of  life,"  and  that  "  the 
apostle  may  have  intended  simply  to  intensify 
the  thought  by  adding  '  buried  with  him  in  bap- 
tism,'" yet  think  "  that  the  thought  in  the  figura- 
tive or  spiritual  is  drawn  from  the  action  of  the 
literal  and  material  ("  C.  and  P.  B.,"  p.  263).  To 
this  Dale  replies:  "There  is  no  'the  action'  be- 
longing to  baptizo.  The  acts  which  meet  the  de- 
mand of  this  word  are  diverse  and  contrary,  and 
therefore  cannot  be  expressed  b}'  it."  His  four 
volumes  are  full  of  the  evidence  that  the  word 
does  not  express  a  definite  act,  but  condition  re- 
sulting from  any  act  or  influence  competent  to 
effect  the  condition. 


286     The  ]\Ieavi):g  and  Poiucr  of  Iniplisin. 

The  literal  and  material  is  the  LASIS  oi"  the  ligu- 
rative  and  spiiitiial.  But,  as  we  have  seen,  this 
literal  and  material  basis  is  not  found  in  the 
Scriptures,  but  in  classic  Greek ;  and  there,  not 
in  a  momentary  act,  to  dip,  but  in  a  condition  of 
intusposition  of  UNLIMITED  CONTIXUANXE.  This 
is  what  gives  to  the  receptive  element  in  lite- 
ral, primar}'  baptism  its  controlling-  influence 
over  the  object  which  it  encloses.  To  this  the 
vital  thought  in  secondary,  spiritual  baptism  cor- 
responds. This  is  what  gives  special  significance 
to  the  baptism  into  the  death  of  Jesus  Christ. 
This  is  v.diat  gives  to  this  baptism  its  meaning, 
life,  and  power.  Those  who  are  baptized  into  the 
death  of  Jesus  Christ,  buried  ii>ith  him  by  the  bap- 
tism into  Ills  DEATH,  come  under  its  full,  special. 
and  soul-transforming  POWER.  They  receive  into 
their  souls  its  sin-remitting  and  its  spiritually  pu- 
rifying influence.  The  death  of  Christ  has  an 
atoning,  life-giving,  redeeming  efficacy,  and  he 
communicates  this  divine  influence  to  those  who 
b)'  the  Holy  Ghost  are  baptized  into  him.  As  in 
primary  baptism  baptizo  does  not  take  out  what 
it  puts  in,  so  in  this  spiritual  baptism  ''  t'ce  SOUL 
is  not  taken  out  of  the  baptism  into-  which  it  is  bap- 
tized." Being  baptized  into  Christ,  //  remains  in 
Christ,  and  continues  in  sin  no  longer.       There    is 


Baptism  into  Christ.  28 7 

a  wealth  ot  profound  and  precious  meaning  in 
that  expression  which  we  meet  with  so  often  in 
t!ic  New  Testament,  in  Christ.  Into  this  bhss- 
ful  and  lasting  condition  we  come  by  BAPTISM 
INTO  Christ.  Out  of  this  baptism  the  soul  is 
never  taken,  but  continues  in  it  for  ever. 


1^) 


i 


